Posted on 06/28/2010 4:16:42 PM PDT by Kaslin
Now that the Supreme Court of the United States has decided that the Second Amendment to the Constitution means that individual Americans have a right to bear arms, what can we expect?
Those who have no confidence in ordinary Americans may expect a bloodbath, as the benighted masses start shooting each other, now that they can no longer be denied guns by their betters. People who think we shouldn't be allowed to make our own medical decisions, or decisions about which schools our children attend, certainly are not likely to be happy with the idea that we can make our own decisions about how to defend ourselves.
When you stop and think about it, there is no obvious reason why issues such as gun control should be ideological issues in the first place. It is ultimately an empirical question whether allowing ordinary citizens to have firearms will increase or decrease the amount of violence.
Many people who are opposed to gun laws that place severe restrictions on ordinary citizens owning firearms have based them on the Second Amendment to the Constitution. But, while the Supreme Court must make the Second Amendment the basis of its rulings on gun control laws, there is no reason why the Second Amendment should be the last word for the voting public.
If the end of gun control leads to a bloodbath of runaway shootings, then the Second Amendment can be repealed, just as other constitutional amendments have been repealed. Laws exist for people, not people for laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Ping
I say we uses this to get liberals to support a repeal of the 14th amendment.
and thus get rid of:
- illegal alien babies.
- Roe v. Wade (depended upon incorporation)
- Federal usurpation of our right to teach religion ideas in school, as well as generally practice religion around our state governments in general.(also depended upon incorporation)
- Eliminate the looming threat of liberals using the equal protection clause to impose more socialist/leftist madness on us.
I grew up here in rural michigan where guns are more common than people. In my 45 years I have never seen a shooting or personally known anyone who was shot. Its been nearly 30 years since the last murder in my little town.
Yeah the bloodbath will happen any minute now.
A Sowell BTT. He is, as usual, straight to the point.
I don’t care if they disarm their people as long as they don’t disarm our people. I’d very prefer the leftist States remain in a tactically inferior position to our freedom loving States.
My pleasure, jazusamo
Not so fast! The standard view is that rights in the Constitution as ratified and the original BOR were preexisting and that CONUS and the BOR simply enumerated them. If that's the case, rights that are actually in there cannot be amended away, because all you'd be amending away is the redundant enumeration, not the right itself.
I wonder does he feel the same way about all contracts?
The whole reason for having a constitution is so that we can enumerate exactly to what we are agreeing. If we don't agree to that any more we can change it by agreeing to an amendment.
We don't need any judge trying to interpret the contemporary significance of what is in plain english.
There won’t be any blood bath. Gun bans invariably take a bad crime conflict situation and make it worse, not better.
Note clearly dear reader: An unarmed person is a serf. An armed person is a citizen. This principle goes back to Ancient Greece. A citizen had his own armour and was expected to defend his polis.
The individual has a God given right to defend him or herself.
Me? No way.
Truth be known, I have, on occasion, shown some intense dislike with a FTF or FTE.
I usually get over it.
>> Note clearly dear reader: An unarmed person is a serf. An armed person is a citizen.
Good point.
Yes, and no man made law can enhance or nullify our Natural Right to defend ourselves, family, property or the means to change our government.
The most important arenas of gun and self-defense rights are the state legislatures.
"Why Switzerland has the lowest crime rate in the world."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nf1OgV449g&feature=related
In theory, perhaps, but one doesn’t have to be a Federalist to admit that our rights would have been trampled long ago if not for enumeration. We shouldn’t need them enumerated, yet that’s how people see it.
Yes. Right on the mark Dr. Sowell. Thanks for the ping to another good read jaz.
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.