Who's Right on the Second?

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-volohk120602.asp ^ | Eugene Volokh

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[dead]

Say the Ninth Circuit was wrong, last year's Emerson decision from the Fifth Circuit was right, and the Framers thought of the Amendment as securing an individual right. Shouldn't judges update it due to the passage of time, based on evolving standards of justice and practicality?

I was just about to lambast him for even posing such an asinine question, but he shot it down later, so I held my fire.

[yendu bwam]

The Constitution can live and breath - but should only do so through the amendment process - as per the will of the people of this country. It was never meant to live and breath with the radical interpretations of a few men and women sitting on a high bench. Allowing the Supreme Court justices to read anything at all into the Constitution is like letting them write a new one.

[pabianice]

Not reported in the Boston Globe; ignored by the ACLU.

[45Auto]

"One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."

The 2nd is about having the ability to resist tyranny from the inside or to resist being conquered from the outside. That's the polite translation. The more precise one is that the citizens must retain the means to shoot every bastard politician who trys to usurp liberty. Jefferson would have heartily approved.

[Sgt_Schultze]

In the body of the Consititution itself, the framers dealt with the topic of fielding an Army and Navy. To believe that the framers were so stupid as to propose an unarmed military is the penultimate statement of ignorance. If one believes that Amendment 2 was written to guarantee the government's right to keep and bear arms, then that person is an a$$.

The entirety of the Bill of right spelled out further restriction on the powers of the federal government. Don't believe me, here are the words of the founders written in the most forgotten words of the founders...

The Preamble to The Bill of Rights

Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.

[Puppage]

The Second Amendment as written was meant to apply only to the federal government So, a government has to pass a law giving itself the right to have a weapon? What kind of crap is THAT?

[Puppage]

The Second Amendment as written was meant to apply only to the federal government

So, a government has to pass a law giving itself the right to have a weapon? What kind of crap is THAT?

[Libertarianize the GOP]

Our Constitution was intended to enumerate all of the legitimate government powers and leave all non-enumerated powers to the State's or to the people.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

The Ninth Circuit should be ignored.

[michigander]

The Supreme Court’s Thirty-five Other Gun Cases: What the Supreme Court Has Said about the Second Amendment

[Puppage]

Disbanded sounds much nicer....

[Puppage]

Disbanded sounds much nicer....

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Yup !

[Warren]

Evolving constitution? A can of worms I wouldn't want to open. Okay, so they change one part. Would they stop there? Algore's evolved constitution would evolve to:
To each according to his needs . . . .

[MEGoody]

"Algore's evolved constitution would evolve to: To each according to his needs . . . ."

And Al Gore would, of course, be the one deciding what those needs are.

[jwalsh07]

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Unlike the first amendment the words, "Congress shall make no law", do not appear. The fourteenth amendment is moot here. The States can not violate the plain meaning of the Constitution by taking our guns.

[Badray]

Thanks for the link. That looks to be a great resource.

[MHGinTN]

Aren't those generally classified as SCOTUS PENumbras?