Barack Obama has violated the United States constitution by denying certain people the right to bear arms. In his recent speech (link below), he formulated a series of arguments on why such action needed to happen. The arguments were interesting. There is a problem. Arguments are not permitted the influence to usurp the United States constitution. One might say, well, what about good arguments? The answer is no. Take any law, which a person breaks.

Let us say, for example a speed limit law. The violator of the speed limit might argue, “I was speeding ten miles over the speed limit, 60 mph in a 50 mph zone. I was late for my cousins wedding. It is a straight road, and there was no one else on the road. So, there didn’t seem to be a reasonable danger in going ten miles over the speed limit.” That is a understandable argument for taking exception to the speed limit. The problem is, an argument is not adequate for violating the law. By comparison, should an argument by Obama be adequate for violating the United States constitution? I argue no.

Obama likes to tell people what he is not going to do. The following is something the United States constitution is not designed to do. The constitution is not designed to be fully agreed with by all of those influenced by its rule. In principle, some people of the United States are bound to like some parts of it and dislike other parts. In fact, some might sincerely dislike certain parts of it. So, what should the person do, if they do not like the United States constitution? To the authors mind, if the president cannot live with the United States constitution, (inspiring his own tears, no less) then his response should be to move to a country that is not governed by it.

The United States constitution is the absolute bedrock for the protection of the people from the government. From here what we need to do is to tighten the security so that our future presidents have a more difficult time violating the constitution. For, under the current constraints, and as we’ve just observed, all it takes is a Barack Obama who at one moment will swear on oath to uphold the constitution, but in the next, will treat the United States constitution as not worth the paper it was written on.