It is just possible that government has invented something new, “safe-free zones.”
I’ll name it that and save them the trouble.
What is safe about the SAFE Act?
“To protect” is the idea. But don’t expect your rights to be secured inside.
Free from danger or injury; unhurt: safe and sound. 3. Free from risk; sure: a safe bet. 4. Affording protection: a safe place.
Safe-free zones is kind of an oxymoron, but that is the result of Cuomo’s “Safe Act”. Or you could call them rights-free zones.
Governments are instituted among men to secure their unalienable rights.
Safety would be government securing our God-given rights as a priority.
Instead, when they use the word “safe” or safety, it often means “now we are going to limit your rights.” It is not a zero sum game. Securing rights now means taking away people’s rights. So lawmakers had to use the acronym “SAFE” for gun control. That doesn’t make it so.
Enter Governor Cuomo:
NY Governor Cuomo is deliberately using “Safety” as a political device. They should outlaw cars because there people can be killed in cars. No? Maybe you should be prohibited from speech in a movie theater because people have screamed “fire” or created panic. How about we ban some words because they can be used a certain way? (too late…) How about we prohibit assembly because it can turn into a riot?
When did people’s rights become such a threat to government? On the contrary, government has become a threat to our rights. Why should taking away rights make you safer?
But the real crux of the problem is someone who is tasked to preserve and secure our God-given rights, is directly trampling on them. At the very same time he is trying to promote late-term abortion – a gruesome act according to anyone with eyes to see.
Would he regulate and ban scissors because they are used in abortions? I’m serious. Even the pro-life Right is not asking for that. They don’t even blame those vacuums and suction hoses. But Cuomo actually wants to protect and legalize late-term abortions, and even let them choose the means.
So Cuomo is on a mission and the objective is to restrict, limit and destroy our rights. The other is to give even more power to the government, to track people and mine information from them, then use this information in any way they see fit against them.
All that in his agenda under the guise of “Safe”. Know this, you will not be “safe” from the ever-encroaching government or its burgeoning bureaucracy. You are not meant to be. Thus, you will not be safe or secure in your possessions or papers. You’re security and freedom is a disposable commodity to Cuomo and the Left. That “freedom” is a threat to our government and others, in their minds. How else could you explain their actions?
Government’s purpose is apparently not to protect our God-given freedom, but to usurp and abolish it. They have taken that to be their priority in doing so under this “safe act”. The Safe Act is the biggest contradiction and oxymoron I think I have ever seen. The only question for them now is where do they go from here?
Why did they have to name the freedom robbing law the “Safe Act” rather than the Freedom Abolishing Act? Then they could have even used the acronym FAACT. And the fact is they are taking freedom and liberty and burying them as deep as they can, under whatever they can, supposedly to create Safety. Only they could have thought of it.
If Obama calls his signature healthcare takeover an “affordability” act when it drives up costs, then using that standard Cuomo has declared his candidacy.
We know the Second Amendment says the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. What about others?
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
How about the Fifth amendment?
“…nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
How about the fourteenth Amendment:
(Sec. 1) – No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
WND – “Governor Andrew Cuomo, as the New York Times reports, proposes to repeal any protection granted third-trimester fetuses in New York. His “reform” is supported by a wide array of public figures and powerful institutions, including the organizations that perform many of the abortions in your own diocese.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/filmmaker-asks-bishop-to-excommunicate-cuomo/#dZHPcmhSYv4hOmGR.99
H/T to Pepp for pointing out that article in a comment on a prior post.
Remember when Hillary and others declared abortions should be safe, legal, rare. “Dr.” Gosnell destroyed her notion as the bologna it is.
…If and ONLY when the government declares it one.
How about a “Give Me a Break Act”, sound too corny?
Right to Life Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness now means restricting your second amendment. A government of, by, and for government for the the protection of same.