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

Skip to comments.

Seven States Failing to Protect 'Right to Keep and Bear Arms,' Says Lawyer
CNSNews.com ^ | April 26, 2002 | Jim Burns

Posted on 04/26/2002 2:54:43 PM PDT by Stand Watch Listen

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

1 posted on 04/26/2002 2:54:43 PM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bang_list
indexing

2 posted on 04/26/2002 2:55:59 PM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
Kopel and Volokh don't really disagree, in my opinion, they are just talking about two different approaches.
3 posted on 04/26/2002 3:09:35 PM PDT by spqrzilla9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
The (United States) Supreme Court has not ruled definitively whether the Second Amendment is enforceable against the states.

As if that's needed. Is there any question that the other amendments in the Bill of Rights are enforceable against the states? Pi**es me off.

4 posted on 04/26/2002 3:13:22 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
Under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment:

Amendment XIV

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

There shouldn't need to be any debate about this point at all. The damn states DO NOT have the authority to over-ride the protections in the Bill of Rights; or at least, they shouldn't have. The current governor, legislature and AG of Cal have adopted the attitude that the citizens of Cal have no rights except what rights they [the demonRAT Party] deem acceptable.

5 posted on 04/26/2002 3:14:41 PM PDT by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Especially since one of the practices which the Fourteenth Amendment was specifically intended to prohibit was the disarmament of freedmen (it is a little-known historical fact that the postwar Black Codes included the first wave of gun control in America).
6 posted on 04/26/2002 3:19:08 PM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen

7 posted on 04/26/2002 3:20:00 PM PDT by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
The US SC has the power to avert Civil War II if they would simply incorporate the 2nd under the 14th. They ought to wise up before its too late.
8 posted on 04/26/2002 3:21:58 PM PDT by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
FYI: The 14th wasn't properly ratified. It is void and invalid. Remember the 14th is the tool of the left that is used to force all kinds of unconstitutional garbage on us. The Founders never intended for an all powerful central federal government, that is what the 14th caused.

Now I do believe that Firearms ownership is an individual right. The problem in those 7 states that don't restate that right is a problem with the people in those states. If you are a conservative you don't have to live in those scum-bucket states.

Secondly How in the world did North Carolina rank so high on the list of this anti-gun Report Card. CCW Permits are Shall Issue, Open Carry is legal, Car carry without a permit is legal provided the gun is in plane view, North Carolina is actually a Gun Friendly State (except for the fact that they require handgun permits to buy handguns.)

9 posted on 04/26/2002 3:23:25 PM PDT by FF578
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
Or if you prefer,


10 posted on 04/26/2002 3:23:38 PM PDT by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FF578
The 14th wasn't properly ratified. It is void and invalid. Remember the 14th is the tool of the left that is used to force all kinds of unconstitutional garbage on us.

More specifically the 14th Amendment wasn't ratified by 3/4 of the states and the amendment wasn't approved by a full senate since the then Republican Party, which controlled the senate, would not recognize senators from the antibellum states.

Another sad chapter in American history.

The resultant amendmant increased the power of the judiciary to legislate and tilted the balance of political power from the states to the federal government. The 14th Amendment is rightfully called by many the "downfall of our fine democracy".

11 posted on 04/26/2002 3:37:13 PM PDT by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
I do believe California had a RKBA in its Constitution up until the 1970's when the Jerry Brown crowd, along with the Democrat majority State House, had it removed.

This state continues to devolve individual rights into power to the socialists in the legislature such as Ortiz, Perata, Bowen and Scot.

However, there is ONE good that has come out of the "Gun Wars". Namely, the study of the U.S. Constitution by those that would have ignored it, and not been enlightened by its wisdom.

12 posted on 04/26/2002 4:30:51 PM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: spqrzilla9
Professor Eugene Volokh, who teaches firearms law at the UCLA Law School, believes Kopel is wrong in arguing that firearms clauses should be added to state constitutions.

"The Second Amendment, like the First, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments, refers to a right of the people, not a right of the states or a right of the National Guard," Volokh said.

--------------------------

The 'difference in approach' is all important.
Kopel is in affect agreeing with anti-U.S.-constitutionalists that state constitutions NEED such clauses. Which is a form of appeasment. -- They do not.

The 2nd is the law of the land.

13 posted on 04/26/2002 4:51:07 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag; ff578
Remember the 14th is the tool of the left that is used to force all kinds of unconstitutional garbage on us. The Founders never intended for an all powerful central federal government, that is what the 14th caused.

The above is BS propoganda put out by anti-constitutional & socialist statists. They advocate 'majority rule' government by states.

Central government was not caused by the 14th, ratified in '68. -- It was caused by the states themselves surrendering authority to 'progressive' federal schemes, fostered by both political parties, beginning shortly before WWI. -- 50 years after the 14th. -- And not really solidified untill the 1930's.

The 'problem' is not with our constitution. --- Our political system subverting the constitution is the problem.

14 posted on 04/26/2002 5:12:29 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: *Iowa
Iowa seems to fall with NC outside of the discretionary permit system in place here. Everyone has a gun, open carry is legal, etc...

The constitutional clause must have coutned heavily toward the final score.

15 posted on 04/27/2002 4:12:46 AM PDT by Gianni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
The damn states DO NOT have the authority to over-ride the protections in the Bill of Rights; or at least, they shouldn't have.

"But it is universally understood, it is a part of the history of the day, that the great revolution which established the constitution of the United States, was not effected without immense opposition. Serious fears were extensively entertained that those powers which the patriot statesmen, who then watched over the interests of our country, deemed essential to union, and to the attainment of those invaluable objects for which union was sought, might be exercised in a manner dangerous to liberty. In almost every convention by which the constitution was adopted, amendments to guard against the abuse of power were recommended. These amendments demanded security against the apprehended encroachments of the general government--not against those of the local governments." -Barron v. Baltimore, 7 Pet. 243

"The Second Amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress." - US Supreme Court, United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876), Presser v. State of Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886)


16 posted on 04/27/2002 7:51:49 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen; coolbreeze
"In New Jersey, they don't have the right of initiative in the state. They don't have the ability to change their constitution by collecting petitions to put an initiative on the state ballot," Kopel said.

Delaware is in the same boat - and we wonder why we want to move to Virginia!!!!!!

17 posted on 04/27/2002 11:59:06 AM PDT by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen

18 posted on 04/27/2002 12:24:31 PM PDT by Mulder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
I was under the impression that Amendments prohibiting something to the Federals also applied down to the States.

So the 1st Amendment granting of freedom of religion also means that New York cannot prohibit Catholics from freely practicing their religion.
19 posted on 04/27/2002 2:05:52 PM PDT by Conservative til I die
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Conservative til I die
I was under the impression that Amendments prohibiting something to the Federals also applied down to the States.

They were only restrictions on the powers delegated to the federal government.

There has been a selective judicial "incorporation" of portions of the BOR through the 14th Amendment.

20 posted on 04/27/2002 2:25:53 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 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