Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CNN's Toobin: 'Preposterous' to Believe in 2nd Amend. Right Back at Harvard
NewsBusters.org ^ | 7/15/2009 | Matthew Balan

Posted on 07/15/2009 4:39:53 PM PDT by Pyro7480

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-118 next last
So eltist of him...
1 posted on 07/15/2009 4:39:53 PM PDT by Pyro7480
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

The second amendment is as much a right as the 1st


2 posted on 07/15/2009 4:40:37 PM PDT by GeronL (UnitedCitizen.Blogspot.Com --------- United Citizens Nation! ------------- Join Today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Proof the “Brothels of Higher Learning” have been packed with anti american marxists and worse for at least the last 50 to 60 years.
3 posted on 07/15/2009 4:43:00 PM PDT by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

If we didn’t have liberals, the need for guns would probably drop drastically.


4 posted on 07/15/2009 4:43:11 PM PDT by Republic (Uhbama has sleezed and schmoozed his way through life-he is a silly little boy with inmmature dreams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
“When I was in law school...the idea that you had a Second Amendment right to a gun was considered preposterous...."

Maybe the idea was "preposterous" at Haaaaaavaad, you ignorant, arrogant, elitist, a$$hole, but the rest of us have known of this individual right for our entire lives.

I have grown weary of Harvard educated "analysts".

5 posted on 07/15/2009 4:44:02 PM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
The second amendment is as much a right as the 1st

And since it doesn't apply to individuals, neither does the 16th

6 posted on 07/15/2009 4:44:52 PM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (Move over NetZero - Obama's in the house!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

I am not a fan of guns. Hate them, actually.

That said, the language of the Constitution is plain. There is a right to bear arms, pure and simple. If I do not like it, I can work through the Congress and Ammendment process to get it changed. If not enough people agree to change it - that is if I cannot convince the percentages outlined in the Constitution required to ammend it - then that is my problem.

I wonder what Toobin’s idea on the existence of the right to privacy is? Considering it doesn’t actually exist in the Constitution, I assume he believes the right to privacy is preposterous....right? :-)


7 posted on 07/15/2009 4:44:58 PM PDT by Personal Responsibility (Control the teleprompter, control the agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Well, courts used to say, well, this only affects the rights of state militias.

That is absolutely NOT true.

This man is either ignorant, stupid or he is a bald-faced liar.

8 posted on 07/15/2009 4:46:27 PM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

Good one!


9 posted on 07/15/2009 4:47:09 PM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

“To preserve Liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” (Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, and member of the first Continental Congress, which passed the Bill of Rights)


10 posted on 07/15/2009 4:47:34 PM PDT by optiguy (Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them.----- Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Proving William F. Buckley’s statement that he would rather be governed by those in the first page of the Boston Phone Book than the entire Harvard Faculty.


11 posted on 07/15/2009 4:47:37 PM PDT by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
The nation already has 80-100 million firearms in private hands.

I think that makes the silly question pretty much moot or academic at best.

12 posted on 07/15/2009 4:48:00 PM PDT by muir_redwoods ( How come when I press "1 for English" I still can't understand what's being said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

Exactly.


13 posted on 07/15/2009 4:48:07 PM PDT by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Personal Responsibility
Isn't it just a bit irrational to hate inanimate objects? It's sort of like hating rocks, isn't it?
14 posted on 07/15/2009 4:48:47 PM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Toobin needs to stay off the crack. I didn't go to Harvard Law, but I did go to one of the premiere law schools and I'm a little older than Toobin. The idea that the 2nd Amendment applied to the individual and not the state was in NO WAY be characterized as "preposterous".

This is part of the left's orchestrated effort to paint strict constructionists or movement conservatives as something of a new phenomenon as well as something a fringe movement. The MSM carries their water, as usual.

15 posted on 07/15/2009 4:48:56 PM PDT by OldDeckHand (No Socialized Medicine, No Way, No How, No Time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Yes, of course, the 2nd amendment only gives the state government the right to arm the National Guard.

While the deconstructionist Warren Court had to dig through mountains of papers to find one sentence in a Thomas Jefferson letter that they could torture into nullifying the “free exercise” clause in the 1st Amendment, their modern fellow travellers wouldn’t DARE to try looking for anything like that in the writings of ANY of the nation’s founders respecting the 2nd Amendment.

Their writings are so clear, that even the most cynical deconstructionist would have no success in trying to argue that the Founders would nullify the right to self-defense.


16 posted on 07/15/2009 4:50:25 PM PDT by Westbrook (Having more children does not divide your love, it multiplies it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

“...the idea that you had a Second Amendment right to a gun was considered preposterous.”

That certainly wasn’t true when I was in law school! Most of us took part of November off to go deer hunting. A few of us, myself included, would go bird hunting before and after classes. We’d take our shotguns right into school with us. I don’t remember anyone thinking it was odd at all. Of course, I didn’t go to Harvard....


17 posted on 07/15/2009 4:50:25 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republic
“If we didn’t have liberals, the need for guns would probably drop drastically.”

If people had more guns, liberals would likely drop drastically too!

18 posted on 07/15/2009 4:51:57 PM PDT by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
When I was in law school...the idea that you had a Second Amendment right to a gun was considered preposterous

Funny. The Framers considered it preposterous that one might not have the right to arms.

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair. -- Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 28
I would demand a tuition refund.

ML/NJ

19 posted on 07/15/2009 4:52:09 PM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Personal Responsibility

I respect guns...they literally are the last resort to keep our Republic intact. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool and/or a traitor.


20 posted on 07/15/2009 4:52:47 PM PDT by Globalist Goon ("Head down over a saddle.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-118 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson