Replies

When a second amendment case finally comes before them, the U.S. Supreme Court will examine lower federal circuit court opinions. The 5th Circuit Court's opinion in Emerson is the only one I'm aware of that stated an individual RKBA was protected under the second amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Bliss v. Commonwealth was an 1822 Kentucky State Supreme Court case rendering an opinion on state law under the state constitution.

In 1846 in Nunn v. State, the Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that the second amendment PLUS the rights protected by the Georgia State Constitution allowed for open carry by individuals.

Cockrum v. State was an 1859 case decided by the Texas Supreme Court.

State v. Chandler was an 1850 case decided by the Louisiana Supreme Court.

Beard v. United States was an 1895 U.S. Supreme Court case, but it had nothing to do with the second amendment.

Brown v. State was a 1901 case decided by the Supreme Court of Georgia. Or, if you were referring to People v. Brown, that was a 1931 case decided by the Michigan Supreme Court.

Shelly v. Kramer was a 1947 U.S. Supreme Court case, but it, too, had nothing to do with the second amendment.

What a complete waste of my time. These are state cases.

No federal court has ruled that the second amendment applies to the states -- for a state supreme court to comment on the definition of the second amendment is ludicrous. It has no meaning. It makes no difference what the state court thinks -- the second amendment doesn't apply.

Do you have any other lower federal circuit court decisions like Emerson? From the 1st circuit court, 2nd circuit court, 3rd circuit court, etc? If not, I rest my case.

You SAID there was never a State case that ruled the Second was an individual Right. Given 15 seconds I came up with a few. Now you object BECAUSE they are State cases.

I'd ask you to make up your mind, but I know such is useless. Your mind is already made up and you MUST hold up your Brady Gun Control logic at all costs or you don't get your bonus this week.

We understand your position perfectly.

Further...

No federal court has ruled that the second amendment applies to the states --

Which other parts of the Constitution require a Federal Court to rule on them before they apply? Does a court need to rule on all new legislation passed by Congress before it applies to the States?

You jsut keep getting worse and worse over the years.

-- for a state supreme court to comment on the definition of the second amendment is ludicrous. It has no meaning. It makes no difference what the state court thinks -- the second amendment doesn't apply.

Your opinion that a State court opinion is "ludicrous", is itself ludicrous. -- They have meaning, but solely as opinions.. "-- Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, [to support the 2nd] any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. --"

Do you have any other lower federal circuit court decisions like Emerson?

None are necessary, - as the Constitution itself is clear on the subject. --- Court decisions do not supersede our supreme Law of the Land.

Thus the very importance of the rights protected by the First and Second Amendment was used as the basis for the argument that they did not apply to the states under the Fourteenth Amendment. In later opinions, chiefly Presser v. Illinois 61 andMiller v. Texas 62 the Supreme Court adhered to the view. Cruikshank has clearly been superseded by twentieth century opinions which hold that portions of the Bill of Rights — and in particular the right to assembly with which Cruikshank dealt in addition to the Second Amendment — are binding upon the state governments. Given the legislative history of the Civil Rights Acts and the Fourteenth Amendment, and the more expanded views of incorporation which have become accepted in our own century, it is clear that the right to keep and bear arms was meant to be and should be protected under the civil rights statutes and the Fourteenth Amendment against infringement by officials acting under color of state law.

For those who want to infringe on my natural rights, I got the rope.