just make sure you start with chIraq and go house to house and get all the guns from the thugs first...
Posted on 12/27/2015 11:49:25 AM PST by PROCON
A resolution recently introduced in the Illinois state legislature threatens the natural and fundamental right of citizens of that state to keep and bear arms.
The non-binding measure -- House Resolution 855 -- would urge "the courts, especially the U.S. Supreme Court, to adhere to the clear wording of the Second Amendment being a right afforded to state sponsored militias and not individuals."
The text of the proposal recites a section of the dissent by Justice John Paul Stevens to the District of Columbia v. Heller ruling handed down by the Supreme Court in 2008:
The Second Amendment was adopted to protect the right of the people of each of the several States to maintain a well-regulated militia. It was a response to concerns raised during ratification of the Constitution that the power of Congress to disarm the state militias and create a national standing army posed an intolerable threat to the sovereignty of the several States.
Neither the text of the Amendment nor the arguments advanced by its proponents evidenced the slightest interest in limiting any legislature's authority to regulate private civilian uses of firearms. Specifically, there is no indication that the Framers of the Amendment intended to enshrine the common-law right of self-defense in the Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at thenewamerican.com ...
ILLINOIS is so gone. Unfortunately, I live there.
Ping .....
“Specifically, there is no indication that the Framers of the Amendment intended to enshrine the common-law right of self-defense in the Constitution.”
Except for the writings of every individual involved with the drafting of the amendment or bill of rights.......
Here is the relevant section of the Constitution of the State of Illinois:
SECTION 22. RIGHT TO ARMS
Subject only to the police power, the right of the
individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)
I frankly don’t get the clause about being subject only to the police power, though...
just make sure you start with chIraq and go house to house and get all the guns from the thugs first...
This is what happens when the retards elected other retards. Even the most retarded of retards knows that the BILL OF RIGHTS was written for WE THE PEOPLE, NOT WE THE GOVERNMENT. Geez. The "clear wording" of the Bill of Rights is not rocket science. Why the hell would the Founding Fathers give the government the right to have a militia without the government infringing upon the government's right to have a militia. Stupid bastards.
Sneaky tyrannical bastards.
Since they mention the SCOTUS, they’re pointing at the Federal 2nd amendment, and trying to resurrect the ridiculous argument that the 2nd amendment is to “give” the government the “right” to raise and arm a militia. In what conceivable universe does a government need a constitutional amendment guaranteeing it the right to arm a militia? Every government since the time of the Sumerians has done that, without asking permission first.
Scalia and Kennedy both turn 80 next year. If Hillary gets to replace either one of them then a left wing majority will reverse Heller and decree that the Second Amendment does not mean anything.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
The framer's intent is clear. what's more, this view of their intent is further supported by the many state constitutions that specifically state that the right to keep and bear arms for individual self defense as well as defense of the state is inalienable.
These state constitutions go a step further than the US constitution and specifically state that the military shall always be subservient to the people and the standing armies are to be avoided as they are a "threat to the security of a free state".
As such, it is abundantly clear that the framers did not intend for the right to keep and bear arms to apply only to state and federal government entities and it is even more obvious that they did not intend to deny "the people" the right to keep and bear arms and that they considered a well armed populace the natural and proper bulwark of a free state against any and all forces that would make a state "not free".
It is so obvious that any court that finds otherwise should be considered treasonous and enemy of the constitution itself. Any agents of the government that would attempt to enforce such a treasonous decision should, likewise, be considered treasonous and enemies of the constitution.
"...The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard." (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311)
I am the militia responsible for defending 4/300,000,000th of the USA.
“state sponsored militias”
If that doesn’t strike fear in the hearts of citizens I don’t know what will.
“state sponsored militias”
If that doesn’t strike fear in the hearts of citizens I don’t know what will.
I AM NOT AFRAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Any chance of an escape to better parts?
The Bill of Rights are ALL individual rights.
And they are inalienable rights.
The moonbats try to over-reach, once again.
Of course, you know what that will mean.
Cowboys and muslims will be postponed while America plays cowboys and bureaucrats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.