Pelosi: ‘We Avow the First Amendment’ Because ‘People Have a Right to a Gun’

As Nancy Pelosi appeared on Fox News Sunday with host Chris Wallace, she didn’t seem to know the difference between the First Amendment and the Second Amendment.

During her February 10 segment, Pelosi premised her conversation by pointing out that Japan has, “the most violent games and the rest and the lowest mortality from guns.” This, Pelosi imagined, was because Japan “might have good gun laws.”

The Democrat House Minority Leader then went on to tell Wallace that the First Amendment gave Americans the right to have a gun and that was a thing she and the Democrats want to “avow.”

We’re talking about no further sales of assault weapons. What is the justification for an assault weapon? No further sales of those, no further sales of the increased capacity, 30 rounds in a gun. We’re talking about background checks which is very popular, even among gun owners, and, hunters.

We avow the First Amendment. We stand with that and say that people have a right to have a gun to protect themselves in their homes and their jobs, where ever, and that they–and their workplace–and that they, for recreation for hunting and the rest. So we’re not questioning their right to do that.

This isn’t the first time that former Speaker Pelosi showed a shocking lack of familiarity with the Constitution. Last November during a press availability session, Pelosi again couldn’t remember which Amendment she was talking about.

After a reporter asked about the then coming fiscal cliff deal, Pelosi said, “Well, I’m with the 11th Amendment, so… or is it the 11th Amendment that, uh, (laughs)? 14th is it? Whatever it is I’m with the Constitution of the United States.”

Whatever it is, indeed.

Nev. Dem. Arrested Again For Violence
Which One Would You Trust?
  • Paul Hooson

    Too much botox must cloud the reasoning processes?

  • retired.military

    I honestly think that she is going senile. I mean medically, no shit senile. All politics aside senile.

  • retired.military

    I honestly think that she is going senile. I mean medically, no shit senile. All politics aside senile.

    • jim_m

      Nah. Like the rest of the left she simply doesn’t know what is in the Constitution. They don’t pay attention because they don’t think it is important.

      Look at their criticism of the constitution.

      The issue with the Constitution is not that people don’t read the text and think their following it. The issue with the Constitution is that the text is confusing because it was written more than a hundred years ago.

      Not to mention that it was written by a bunch of racist, white, patriarchal, European males. (never mind that they can’t do simple math to know that it is 225 years old (give or take depending on whether you consider ratification) and not just “more than a hundred”.)

      Plus, the left believes in a living constitution, meaning that it means whatever they want to at any given moment. This coincides with their belief in selective enforcement of the law. If the law means different things at different times they have succeeded in institutionalizing selective enforcement.

      So they don’t need to know what the constitution says, as they say, “What difference does it make?” It means whatever they say it does.

      • herddog505

        I think you’ve hit the nail on the head.

        I suppose that we can take some solace from the fact that the Constitution, on life support though it may be, is still fulfilling the role that was intended by the Founding Fathers: a check on the power of the central government.

        • Conservachef

          Hence all the attempts to twist, abridge, or outright ignore it by so many left-leaning politicians.

    • I’m thinking you’re right.

      There’s really only so much you can do to stave off mental decline – and she wasn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer to begin with…

    • fustian24

      Then again, maybe she’s just stupid. She IS a democrat.

      But, I repeat myself.

  • GarandFan

    Botox has consequences.

  • herddog505

    Let’s not be too hard on her: it’s simply not reasonable to expect a member of Congress to be familiar with the Constitution. After all, they have enough on their plates to remember all the phone numbers for their campaign contributors, call girl services, drug connections, lawyers, etc.


    Her protestation that she stands behind the right to own a gun EXCEPT for those nasty ol’ assault weapons (and I’m guessing that, in her feeble mind, an “assault weapon” is anything with more firepower than a Brown Bess) reminds me of Animal Farm where there came to be exceptions to the rules that (somehow) always favored the pigs.

    “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed EXCEPT when those arms are icky and used only to kill people because, in the wake of the War for Independence, the Founding Fathers CLEARLY were thinking of hunting or keeping slaves in line and NOT about the right of the people to defend themselves, their property, and their rights.”

  • Conservachef

    jim_m said it best, but Hillary’s quote perfectly sums up how many on the left seem to feel about the Constitution- “what difference does it make?”

  • 914

    Twisted, demented, convoluted, polluted logic brought to us by Nancy. Her disorder has won..

  • LiberalNightmare

    Dumb as a stump, but still smarter then the people that keep voting her back in.

  • puhiawa

    She has had a stroke and no one noticed.