Posted on 08/02/2023 5:10:07 AM PDT by marktwain
Related to a recent article about how Judge Roger T. Benitez is working hard on defending the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution against numerous infringements created by the California government, a poster wrote:
Working hard.?? What is it, like twenty-seven words.?
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Many Second Amendment supporters feel similar frustrations. Sometimes the complaint is shortened to four words: …” shall not be infringed“!
Perhaps the most famous case where a judge simply quoted the Second Amendment was the case of U.S. v Miller, brought to the Supreme Court in 1939 by the anti-Second Amendment Roosevelt administration with the connivance of the Roosevelt-appointed anti-Second Amendment judge Heartsill Ragon. From a previous AmmoLand article:
Then in 1939, the Miller case was set up by Heartsill Ragon. Ragon was an anti-Second Amendment ideologue and a President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) ally appointed from Congress to the federal judgeship. The case went to the Supreme Court without opposing counsel or briefs. The Supreme Court refused to rule on whether a sawed-off shotgun (having not been presented with any evidence to the contrary) was an arm protected by the Second Amendment.
The problem with simply saying “What is it, like 27 words?’ or “Shall not be infringed” is the primary power of leftists/progressives has always been the power to control the language by insisting on their definitions and their interpretations of language. The Progressive response to the Second Amendment has been “it is a collective right,” not an individual right, or that “the people” mean only state governments or consists of those people which governments allow to exercise
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
We can thank our indoctrination centers (schools) for that.
Bingo. And people don’t understand that a militia is by definition and armed force created out of the citizenry. Disarming citizens prevents the formation of the militia our founding fathers correctly deemed essential to preservation of a free state.
God created man; Sam Colt made them equal.
If the 2nd Amendment were originally written to read this way would it change the meaning of it? ...
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State The moon, being made of green cheese, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Now…I’m not a lawyer, but I like to keep up with things - I have NEVER heard of such nonsense.
I checked out the accompanying footnote…
” See Jeremy K. Kessler & David E. Pozen, Introduction, The Search for an Egalitarian First Amendment, 118 COLUM. L. REV. 1953, 1959–64 (2018) (reviewing the contemporary debate over “First Amendment Lochnerism,” id. at 1962). Roughly speaking, First Amendment Lochnerism refers to “a First Amendment jurisprudence that disables redistributive regulation and exacerbates socioeconomic inequality.” Id. at 2007.”
” exacerbates socioeconomic inequality”? Ok…I’ll bite.
Why has First Amendment law become such a prominent site for struggles over socioeconomic inequality? Do First Amendment theory and precedent contain egalitarian elements that can be recovered? And what might a more egalitarian First Amendment look like today?
This 59-pages is tough to read, because you have to become detached from reality. It’s word salad like I’ve seen few times in my life.
But because it’s “scholarly” it’ll get picked up and it’ll hit the MSM. Thus, it requires a fortress-like defense and several forms of intellectual ordnance to beat into submission.
In short, we’re at a point where we MUST get AHEAD of these cretins. We MUST establish the intellectual beachhead, so these jack wagons have to come to our Home Stadium. Otherwise, we have to play an Away game we’re the rules AND officials are bent toward the enemy.
Heller clearly stated it’s not a “collective” right, but an Individual Right.
Yes. It was unanimous the right was an individual right. The Leftist judges insisted it was an individual right to join a militia.
Should have happened back when the Branch Davidians were burned to death over baseless allegations and tax stamps on their FFL.
Should have happened when Vicky and Sammy Weaver were murdered over a shotgun with an 18” barrel length.
Should have happened when Heemeyer’s business was run into the ground by the City Council.
When the Bundy’s were cut off from grazing land and LaVoy Finicum was executed with his hands in the air...
With election fraud codified in law, J6 people as POLITICAL prisoners, light bulb bans absent any kind of legislation...
We are WAY past due time... Tree of Liberty is a desiccated husk.
Bttt.
5.56mm
See we can all play the interpretation game! 1st there’s parsing of words and now we have interpretations......
The key, is establishing Home Ice advantage.
We have it on most of the Bill of Rights.
The left has it on pop culture.
It’s not impossible to win without Home Ice advantage. Some actually flourish - the St Louis Blues did a few years ago.
We seem to throw the first two home games lately.
And it in no way helps when the POTUS (any person, any party) tells citizens that he does not work for them. That right there should be grounds for impeachment. Brandon was correct though, he only works for the Biden Family Crime organization. Again, grounds for impeachment.
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.