Obama, who is fresh off his violation of the Constitution last week after throwing the Defense of Marriage Act, now gives a lame Constitutional answer when asked why he doesn't veto the Second Amendment by a Mexican reporter. I guess reporters in Mexico don't do a lot of research either, or they would know the President can't veto a Constitutional article or amendment.
“Well, the Second Amendment in this country is part of our Constitution, and the president of the United States is bound by our Constitution,” Obama said. “So I believe in the Second Amendment. It does provide for Americans the right to bear arms for their protection, for their safety, for hunting, for a wide range of uses.”
Is that the reason our founding fathers gave us the right to bear arms? For hunting and personal protection?
Obama is clueless. The Founding Fathers gave us the right to bear arms to ensure our liberties and freedoms against tyranny and oppression both foreign and domestic. If need be and we are at risk of losing our Constitutional freedoms, our founding fathers knew firearms and the threat of firearms would be the hope of defending freedom and liberty. Read the Second Amendment. It says nothing about the right to bear arms to go hunting and for personal protections. It clearly says the right to bear arms is a deterrent to those willing to infringe upon those liberties.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Now remember, Obama is a "Constitutional scholar." Not a very good one at that.