Posted on 04/27/2014 4:38:28 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Just as retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens is publicly declaring that the U.S. Constitution needs to be changed to restrict gun ownership to make it consistent with the wishes of the Founding Fathers, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is putting the National Rifle Association on notice that he intends to dig into his deep pockets and spend upwards of $50 million to influence local and state politicians to support gun control.
Stevens gave an interview to ABC News to coincide with the publication of his new book, “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution.” Among Stevens’ “moderate proposals” to the Constitution is a five-word change to the Second Amendment. Stevens wants to add the words “when serving in the Militia” so that it would read: “the right of the people to keep and bear arms – when serving in the Militia – shall not be infringed.”
Stevens said the original intention of the founders was not to grant a general right to bear arms to all citizens — though the Supreme Court’s 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller decision was counter to the beliefs of the liberal former justice, who President Barack Obama replaced on the court with another liberal, Elena Kagan, when Stevens retired in 2010.
“The likelihood of [widespread outlawing of firearms] is quite remote,” he said, because the gun lobby “is able to take care of itself in the democratic debates, which would continue with my amendment.”
“There was a fear among the original framers that the federal government would be so strong that they might destroy the state militias,” Stevens said. “The amendment would merely prevent arguments being made that Congress doesn’t have the power to do what they think is in the best public interest.”
As Stevens is making his case against guns, Bloomberg, in an interview with The New York Times, boldly declared that he is ready to spend abundantly to build a nationwide grass-roots network to motivate voters who feel strongly about curbing gun violence. Bloomberg said gun-control advocates must adopt the tactics of the NRA and punish those politicians who fail to support their agenda — even Democrats.
“They say, ‘We don’t care. We’re going to go after you,’ ” he said of the NRA. “ ‘If you don’t vote with us, we’re going to go after your kids and your grandkids and your great-grandkids. And we’re never going to stop.’ ”
“We’ve got to make them afraid of us,” he told the Times.
The former mayor will restructure the groups he already funds — Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America — and bring them under a new umbrella group called Everytown for Gun Safety, according to the Times, which said women and mothers in particular will be the focus of the message.
And instead of trying to pursue major Congressional legislation, which history shows is unlikely to happen, the group will go after individual politicians. According to the Times, Bloomberg’s $50 million would dwarf the $20 million the NRA spends every year on political activities and the $30 million the billionaire Koch brothers reportedly have spent in the last six months to help Republicans take over the Senate. The Times said Bloomberg’s group will focus on 15 states, from places like Colorado and Washington state, where gun-control initiatives have advanced recently, to states that are expected to be more hostile, like Texas, Montana and Indiana. The group has set a goal of signing up 1 million new supporters this year — adding to the 1.5 million they already have.
Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, didn’t sound afraid of Bloomberg’s efforts. “He’s got the money to waste,” Pratt said. “So I guess he’s free to do so. But frankly, I think he’s going to find out why his side keeps losing.”
Abortions kill one hell of a lot more American children than guns do. Shut up Stevens. You’re retired and America is a better place for it.
“Stevens said the original intention of the founders was not to grant a general right to bear arms to all citizens”
And he was a supreme court justice? How did he ever graduate law school and pass the bar with such ignorance?
He wants to be Jimmy Carter II. Poor job when in office and demonstrates why he is irrelevant when out of office.
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2312894/posts
The fascist need to take away our firearms so they can take complete control of everything. We are no longer a free country.
“A people unwilling to use extreme violent force to preserve or obtain their liberty deserves the tyrants that rule them” Stockpirate
I doubt Stevens is really that stupid. He is just a big fat liar.
Retired Justice Wants to Use Law to Fight Guns, While Former NYC Mayor Wants to Use Money
_____________________________________
I find that when it comes to fighting guns, neither law nor money is effective.
Use BIGGER guns.
“Stevens said the original intention of the founders was not to grant a general right to bear arms to all citizens”
An absolute moron that I can’t believe served on the Supreme Court.
“Stevens said the original intention of the founders was not to grant a general right to bear arms to all citizens”
The Bill of Rights does NOT “grant” any rights.
It preserves the natural rights of the citizens against the depredations of government.
Are we in Alice in Wonderland territory here?
Stevens thinks we need to change the 2nd amendment to bring it in line with the intentions of the Founding Fathers?
The Founding Fathers wrote the constitution, and wrote it in a way to convey their intent. How does it make sense to say we have to change the wording of it, to bring it in line with their intent???
Does anyone else see the flaw in the reasoning??? They wrote it to reflect their intentions.
Gingrich was right when he said that these Justices should be brought before Congress to explain their decisions, even though this one is retired, they should still make a fool of him on National TV, and maybe hold him in Contempt of Congress and JAIL him if he Refuses to answer Anything.
The country has to be purged of these traitors.
That way, we wouldn't have to listen to some senile old 90+ year old ex-Supreme Court justice blather about stuff he wants in his senility.
Actually, he is correct, in that the Bill of Rights does not "grant" any rights. It simply recognizes them as pre-existing.
That being said, the rest of his interpretation is about as statist as they come.
Now I know Ford was not exactly a conservative. But he must have picked up a few pointers along the way about what the Constitution means.
I'm not old enough to know how this guy's confirmation went, but even a stupid republican had to know who we was appointing.
I still can't get over how GHWBush could nominate a pinko like David Souter, yet hit a home run like Clarence Thomas.
Did these "republican" presidents have absolutely NO clue?
Hell, even liberal Nixon regretted Blackmun.
And that must tell you something.
I used to work with a guy who was kin to Blackmun. I think a cousin but can’t say for sure.
I do remember he said the entire family despised him for what he did on the supreme court. This old guy was from Birmingham, Alabama originally.
The law is an ass. So is Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.
Militias are specifically provided for in the First and Second Articles of the Constitution, and the division of state and federal responsibilities are set forth therein. Stevens’ theories make the Second Amendment unnecessary, inexplicable and contrary to the contemporary understandings as expressed in the Federalist Papers.
Having failed to eviscerate the plain meaning of the Second Amendment by judicial fiat, he is now turning as a last resort to the only legitimate means of changing the Constitution — by amendment.
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.