Posted on 06/04/2009 5:59:45 AM PDT by epow
On Wednesday, June 3, the National Rifle Association filed a petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of NRA v. Chicago. The NRA strongly disagrees with yesterday's decision issued by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, holding that the Second Amendment does not apply to state and local governments
What we do have is a right to arms for self defense. Hence his cleverly worded "except in private self defense" that you so casually glossed over.
You still haven't found that clause in the Constitution requiring "incorporation" by the SCOTUS before the Amendments apply to the States.
BS. Your entire argument is predicated upon judicial activism. Your beloved "incorporation" doctrine that isn't listed anywhere in the Constitution as being required.
Art 6 para 2 says your Court was full of crap...
Pot doesn’t make people this psychotic and in complete denial of reality.
"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense."
Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion, not State government discretion, individual discretion. To arrive at your interpretation of the first John Adams quote, you would have to conclude that he changed his mind about the subject sometime between the two statements.
Unless you found the magically hidden clause in the Constitution that requires Judicial sign off on any and all Amendments?
Yeah... I didn't think so.
You didn't read their quotes, did you? If you had, you would never have concluded that most of them were espousing the view that the tight to keep and bear arms is a right of the people, and a right of the people cannot be restricted by ANY government.
It should have been:
You didn't read their quotes, did you? If you had, you would never have concluded that most of them were NOT espousing the view that the right to keep and bear arms is a right of the people. A right of the people cannot be restricted by ANY government.
The left has always seen the 14th Amendment as a means to end federalism and incorporate the states into a general government, one act of judicial legislation at a time.
Colonies of what? Your ignorance is a bottomless well.
The War of Independence was long over. They were a confederation of independent States on the cusp of creating a distinct federal government and delegating certain limited powers to it. The subsequently ratified Bill of Right clarified the limits of those federal powers, and which was universally understood not to be a set of restrictions on the sovereign states.
The law isn't limited to robbery, rape and theft. People couldn't carry arms within the town limits, if that was the law there. Or carry concealed arms, if that was the law. Or discharge arms within town limits, if that was the law. Slaves could not bear arms, if that was the state or local law.
The exercise of police powers to regulate the ownership and use of firearms belonged to the states and their municipalities, as opposed to your dream of centralized government and rule from the federal bench.
Unlike you, the Founding Fathers were not dogmatic simpletons.
Backwards. I oppose incorporation. You support it even more devoutly than Souter and Ginsberg combined.
You always seem to assume the worst in others. The error in my previous statement was a result of not double-checking the dates before I posted it. I assumed that you had previously said the quotes were irrelevant to this debate because they were made before any historic discussions of the right to keep and bear arms. That would have placed them in the time period during which colonies, not States, existed.
On checking each one just now, I see you were in error before when you categorized them that way.
Most of those quotes were made in reference to debates about the right to keep and bear arms, and that makes them directly relevant to our little debate in this thread. They most definitely make the point that the right to keep and bear arms is a right of the people that cannot be restricted by ANY government.
BTW, the first quote speaks of State government without using the word State. Seems you are being anal about insisting that any quote (including a quotation of the 2nd Amendment) MUST include the word State, or it isn’t referring to States. That’s a sophomoric position to take.
You are wrong on the facts and wrong on the concept. You are wrong. You’ve being proven wrong by several FReepers on this thread, but you continue to deny it.
You individually decide whether or not you are willing to take up arms "for defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." Carry a concealed weapon in violation of state law and land in the pokey, per Dead Corpse's beloved Nunn decision.
And cases like Nunn tossed them out as unConstitutional.
Next...
Which I oppose and you support.
Next...
Which violates our RKBA, an individual Right the Founders made special protections for.
This violates Title 18 Sect 242 on the part of the State officials enforcing these laws.
Go beg...
Not only were the States not colonies when those statements were made, the statements were NOT about the applicability of the 2nd Amendment to the States. They couldn't be, because the 2nd Amendment did NOT exist when they were written.
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.