This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Clearly a reference to the "Miller" case.
They came to that conclusion because by the time the case reached them, Miller was dead and nobody paid his lawyers to appear to make the case that sawed-off shotguns were in fact excellent weapons for trench warfare.
All part of a well-organized leftist game plan. The goal is to create (or at least simulate) a wave of public demand to disarm American citizens.
That POS is still sucking oxygen???
George Mason, who authored the 2nd Amendment, later stated that the reference to “militia” specifically means the populace, as a bulwark against the tyranny that leftists like Stevens advocate.
Wait ... so a paid parade of trained poodles who turned out far less of a crowd than they imagined and give a speech on the capital is enough for this twit to want to destroy the constitution?
Is this moron for real?
There were far MORE tea partiers on the own demanding a repeal to Obamacare - so does he agree that’s justification to amend the constitution and get government out of healthcare?!
Naaah naaah - he’s just a moron.
I doubt he even wrote that. Someone put his name on it and sent it in.
For over 200 years after the adoption of the Second Amendment, it was uniformly understood as not placing any limit on either federal or state authority to enact gun control legislation.
Even if the 2nd amendment did not exist, the government may not disarm the public. See the Presser case.
It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United States as well as of the states, and, in view of this prerogative of the general government, as well as of its general powers, the states cannot, even laying the constitutional provision in question [2nd amendment] out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms, so as to deprive the United States of their rightful resource for maintaining the public security, and disable the people from performing their duty to the general government. But, as already stated, we think it clear that the sections under consideration [Illinois parade permit laws] do not have this effect.Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886)
Our government is full of the most brazen liars. Despicable people.
He really said, “let’s have a civil war!”
There is no question that Mr. Stevens is fully aware that a civil war would follow and millions would die.
Sick MFer.
***In 1939 the Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress could prohibit the possession of a sawed-off shotgun because that weapon had no reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a “well regulated militia.” ***
People should really look at this case. A man was arrested between Oklahoma and Arkansas with a sawed off shotgun as he was planning to rob a bank, the case went to the SCOTUS. When the case came up, the person arrested did not show as he was already dead, so only an anti-gun argument was used to uphold the law.
In the 1970s lots of TV shows tried to use this to prove handguns had “no reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a “well regulated militia.””
Back then, rifles were A-OK but handguns were BAD!.
The students were no more “civically engaged” than the signs they carried. Just a gaggle of useful idiots parroting their masters’ slogans.
The "standing army" of the 18th century was of concern, because its primary function was domestic enforcement of the will of the government. One of the major "checks and balances" they installed, was to try to ensure that the federal government would have NO ABILITY to enforce its decrees without the active support of local authorities.
In 21st Century America, armed "federal law enforcement" is the standing army the Founders so feared.
Back in 1857, the SCOTUS listed in the Dred Scott Case the rights all CITIZENS OF THE USA have. One of which was “The right to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”
The Dred Scott case is dead today, but those rights still remain.
There’s a process defined if you want to amend the Constitution. Good luck with that, judge.
I say go for it...
All of this whining about gun control from the left is just that — whining. If they really want to change things, launch a repeal effort. It’s the only thing that they can do to get rid of guns.
Of course, there’s a few flies in that ointment.
They’ll need 2/3 of Congress to pass it, followed by 3/4 of the states to ratify. That’ll take probably about 10 years or so, IF they can get the votes (which is highly unlikely). But for the sake of argument, let’s say they get it through. There’s 300 million firearms in circulation here. It’ll take another 50-100 years to get rid of those, but that doesn’t count the smuggling that will take place to replace those that are lost.
But in the end, if they want to get rid of guns, all the whining in the world won’t change anything. They are more than welcome to take the steps that will ban them — repeal.
Good luck with that...
And no guns either and nothing but butter knives on the premises.
Robberies, home invasions, homicidal vengeance attacks and just doped-up lunatic off-handed murders would be carried out much faster and cleaner than now, with the likely end result of fewer deaths overall.
Plus "the media" would be a helluva lot more careful about what they say.
In the meantime, Justice Stevens, why don't you shut up, die and let us go on trying to live our own decent, God-fearing and ARMED lives as we are guaranteed the right to do!
They did something else with that decision. They ruled that the individual could own a firearm in common use of the day.
The AR15 is in common use of the day?
If the nation felt a strong need to amend the Constitution they could repeal the 2nd Amendment but that would not give Congress the power to legislate gun ownership. It would however remove the prohibition against legislation infringing on the individual’s right to gun ownership.
Just for fun, how do you think Congress would word that legislation?
Why don't we hold another Constitutional convention and let the kiddies run it? They're so much wiser than us adults.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
While we’re going to screw around with the Bill of Rights, we might as well change the Constitution to make Federal “judges” be required to be elected to their positions BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. If these screwball “judges” want to be little gods, the American people should have a say in whether they get to play god or not. It’s time to make these scumbags run for their places on our courts.
While I certainly don’t support repealing the Second Amendment, this guy is doing us a big service in stating that it is valid in the context of civilian ownership of firearms.
"These demonstrations demand our respect."
The fascists are beginning to come forth.