Court agrees to rule on gun case

SCOTUSBLOG.com ^ | 11-20-07 | SCOTUSblog

[An Old Man]

An Old Man Wrote: "It should also be quite apparent that the concept of not infringing upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms in the various states is forbidden to the states by the second sentence of the 14th Amendment."

Robertpaulsoen Answered: "The second sentence concerns the privileges or immunities of "citizens of the United States". "Although the Court has expressed a reluctance to attempt a definitive enumeration of those privileges and immunities of United States citizens which are protected against state encroachment, it nevertheless felt obliged in the Slaughter-House Cases ''to suggest some which owe their existence to the Federal Government, its National character, its Constitution, or its laws."

The court was being quite generous to enumerate what they viewed to be but some of the rights and privileges we citizens enjoy. They were simply doing their duty as required of them under the 9th and 10th amendments.

Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Note The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

This list of rights we have is not limited to those enumerated in the United States Constitution, nor is it limited by lists that are compiled by the various political subdivisions of the states or the federal government.

In reading the 2nd, 9th, 10th and 14the ammendments to the United States Constitution it follows that:

If the United States is prevented from infringing upon the rights of its Citizens, and

If the states are prevented from passing any laws that infringe upon the citizens of the United States, then

Each and every one of the Citizens regardless of any membership in a Milita have a God given right to keep and bear arms which is protected by the Constitution of the United States.

[robertpaulsen]

A God-given right, like life or liberty, would be enjoyed by everyone, wouldn't it? Even non-U.S. Citizens have a right to life in this country. Do they also have the right to keep and bear arms?

Kinda strange, isn't it, that God selected only U.S. Citizens upon whom to bestow certain rights? You woulda thought He would have given them to every human being.

"This list of rights we have is not limited to those enumerated in the United States Constitution, nor is it limited by lists that are compiled by the various political subdivisions of the states or the federal government."

That is correct. However, not all of our rights are protected by the government (federal or state).

"If the United States is prevented from infringing upon the rights of its Citizens, and"

For the first 150 years, the Bill of Rights was only a limitation on the federal government. States were free to infringe, and many did. Some amendments, like the second, the third, the seventh, and the Grand Jury Clause of the fifth amendment still limit only the federal government, not the states.

"If the states are prevented from passing any laws that infringe upon the citizens of the United States, then"

The states are prevented from passing any laws that infringe upon the privileges and immunities of 'citizens of the United States'.

"Each and every one of the Citizens regardless of any membership in a Milita have a God given right to keep and bear arms which is protected by the Constitution of the United States"

The second amendment protects the RKBA from federal infringement only. States are guided by their state constitutions. Which is why different states have different gun laws (eg., concealed carry).

Ever wonder why states have different gun laws if the second amendment did indeed protect all citizens equally?