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

Skip to comments.

Ninth Circus Will Be Overturned (Rush alert!)
EIB ^ | 12/6/2002 | Rush Limbaugh

Posted on 12/07/2002 5:32:06 AM PST by geedee

The Ninth Circus Court of Appeals has ruled that the Second Amendment does not apply to individuals but only to government-run militias. This is the same court that said "under God" does not belong in the Pledge of Allegiance. Rest assured, this court will be overturned - yet again.

Again: liberals look at the Constitution, see what's written and deny it's there, or see things that aren't there and put them in. Judge Stephen Reinhardt ruled, "[W]hat the drafters of the amendment thought necessary to the security of a free state was not an unregulated mob of armed individuals such as Shays' band of farmers, the modern-day privately organized Michigan militia, the type of extremist militia associated with Timothy McVeigh..." He says that "well-regulated" confirms that militia can only reasonably be construed as referring to a force established and controlled by government.

If you apply yourself intellectually, you can get pretty close to original intent of the Founding Fathers in documents such as the Federalist Papers. Shays' Rebellion is just a convenient thing for Judge Reinhardt to use. The trick here is saying that the Founders didn't know that the Michigan militia and Timothy McVeigh would pop up. True enough. But he then assumes that if they had known about them, they'd have agreed on banning guns!

This is a Typical Liberal Smearing of People They Disagree With as Evil

This judge believes that you people who support the Second Amendment might as well be Timothy McVeigh. You single women who buy a gun because your ex-husband threatened to kill you, or you shopkeepers and target shooters – you're all Oklahoma City Bombers. (Notice: "bomber," he didn't use a gun.) Reinhardt writes that the phrase "well-regulated" means that militia refers to an established government military, yet he later admits that the Second Amendment was written before the government had a standing army!

If the Constitution meant to ban private arms, George Washington would have dispatched troops to round up guns, wouldn't he? He'd at least have called for them to be turned in. All the proof you need of this amendment's purpose is that Founders would not have existed as free men had they not taken up arms against an oppressive government.

When they won, they had the humility and wisdom to say, "If this new government gets too oppressive, future citizens must have the right to do what we did." Reinhardt is saying that only government has freedom, and only it can grant the people liberty. 100% wrong. The Constitution says what the government cannot do, not what We the People cannot do. Our rights come from a Creator, they wrote, not from other men. The people who founded this nation didn't just say, "Hey, we're independent, so leave us alone, Georgie." They fought to free themselves – and if you doubt it, you should listen to my EIB Primer on Liberty. It's something you have to hear.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-118 next last
I personally would like to see all guns disappear from society . . . and I'm a West Texas redneck. But, like it or not, the framers of our Constitution clearly give American citizens the right to bear arms. Leftists, as is their custom, parse every single word of the Constitution to try and change things to their views. Rush is right, the pinko Ninth's decision will be overturned.
1 posted on 12/07/2002 5:32:06 AM PST by geedee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: geedee
I personally would like to see all guns disappear from society

You're an idiot or utopian. I don't know which is worse.

2 posted on 12/07/2002 5:35:54 AM PST by BullDog108
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BullDog108
Dale Carnegie grad, right?
3 posted on 12/07/2002 5:41:36 AM PST by twntaipan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: geedee
I personally would like to see all guns disappear from society

Were that to happen, you would also see society itself disappear.

4 posted on 12/07/2002 5:43:48 AM PST by EggsAckley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: geedee
Two isssues:

First, the Constitution distinguishes between rights and powers. Individuals have rights, governments have powers. Thus the Second Amendment must apply to individuals, not to governments. States do not have rights, they have powers, thus the Second Amendment does not give any "rights" to a state or a state-run organization.

Second, Blackstone's Commentaries, on which much of our legal system is based, lists the right to bear arms right after the rights of life, liberty, and property. He states that the right to bear arms is for personal protection, and for protection against tyranny. 9th Circuit ignores the background of the Constitution.
5 posted on 12/07/2002 5:46:31 AM PST by fqued
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: geedee
and I'm a West Texas redneck

Us west Texas rednecks do not aknowledge you as a redneck.May be a pencil neck.

6 posted on 12/07/2002 5:51:34 AM PST by retiredtexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: retiredtexan
aknowledge should be acknowledge
7 posted on 12/07/2002 5:52:57 AM PST by retiredtexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: geedee
Personally, I like to see my mother inlaw disappear. That said, it was stupid of me to say that. Just like your comment. Save your "moral vanity" for someone esle.

Either take a stand or not.

8 posted on 12/07/2002 5:53:42 AM PST by Bluntpoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: geedee
"I personally would like to see all guns disappear from society"
I am not sure of where that comes, it would be like saying I would like to see all cars disappear, or all radios, computers, ect.. Guns are not evil, they never kill, humans that misuse or properly use do. I personbally think that firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens is a great thing. I can only hope that these idiots in the ninth circuit joke get slapped around by the SCOTUS again for this one. I hope you were just trying to make the point that there is no way to diasarm criminals so private ownership is necessary,
9 posted on 12/07/2002 5:57:18 AM PST by BOBWADE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: geedee
I personally would like to see all guns disappear from society . . . and I'm a West Texas redneck....

Podner, I think ya jist might've stepped in it......
INCOMING
(Flame Time)

10 posted on 12/07/2002 6:03:39 AM PST by Fiddlstix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BOBWADE
Has this court ever made a ruling that wasn't overturned? They have a history of foolish rulings followed by a higher court rejecting the 9th's view.
11 posted on 12/07/2002 6:04:49 AM PST by Dutch Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dutch Boy
I think it would be easier to count the ones affirmed by the SCOTUS than to try to tally the reversals!
12 posted on 12/07/2002 6:06:10 AM PST by BOBWADE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: geedee
I personally would like to see all guns disappear from society . . .

Correction: you would like to see crimes of violence disappear from society.

Before there were guns, men with swords did a pretty good job of raping and pillaging through the countryside, and Europe was a scene of untold violence. One main reason was that using a sword well requires practice and skill -- a small band of professional swordsmen can slaughter a larger group of unskilled farmers, even if both side have equal-quality swords. Thus, swords and bows favor those who practice full-time with them. An amateur, on the other hand, can become reasonably good with a handgun or rifle in a couple of weeks of part-time practice, and retain his skill with just a couple of practice sessions per month.

In any event, the United States Code is clear that EVERY able-bodied male is part of the "Unorganized militia":

Sec. 311. - Militia: composition and classes

(a)

The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b)

The classes of the militia are -

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia

13 posted on 12/07/2002 6:06:30 AM PST by SauronOfMordor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: geedee
the framers of our Constitution clearly give American citizens the right to bear arms.

Wrong. The framers recognized a pre-existing right to bear arms and forbid the government to do anything to abridge that right. The Constitution doesn't "give" us any rights; it forbids the government to keep us from exercising our inherent rights.

14 posted on 12/07/2002 6:09:47 AM PST by Doug Loss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutch Boy
Has this court ever made a ruling that wasn't overturned? They have a history of foolish rulings followed by a higher court rejecting the 9th's view.

Judge Reinhardt is he who wrote an opinion a few years ago overturning a state law (Oregon, methinks) against voluntary euthanasia -- he called it his "most well-crafted opinion," which quote speaks volumes about the man's activism. A similar New York law was overturned at the time as well by a different court (tell me these guys don't work in tandem.) The Supremes smacked that all down.

15 posted on 12/07/2002 6:15:22 AM PST by Ironword
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Fiddlstix
Did someone say, "INCOMING!"

geedee Flame-bait since November 21, 2002

16 posted on 12/07/2002 6:16:12 AM PST by steveegg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: geedee
The Militia Act of 1792, which provides a good idea of original intent:
I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment, by the proper non-commissioned Officer of the company, by whom such notice may be proved. That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of power and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and power-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a power of power; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.
All able-bodied men were not only part of the militia, but REQUIRED TO PRIVATELY OWN THEIR PERSONAL MILITARY EQUIPTMENT.
17 posted on 12/07/2002 6:16:53 AM PST by SauronOfMordor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: twntaipan
;^)
18 posted on 12/07/2002 6:17:44 AM PST by BullDog108
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
Bang
19 posted on 12/07/2002 6:18:52 AM PST by Fiddlstix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: geedee
personally would like to see all guns disappear from society

You're a moron or a coward. Probably both.

20 posted on 12/07/2002 6:21:27 AM PST by metesky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-118 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