8 votes

Supreme denies Second Amendment is a right. We've been shafted - AGAIN

The justices’ 5-4 decision was a landmark one, establishing clearly that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is not a lesser right among others in the Bill of Rights, such as freedom of speech. But gun control is not a dead issue.

While the city of Chicago’s ban on handguns was struck down, justices did not strike down all reasonable limits on gun use and ownership. Like in a 2008 decision overturning a Washington, D.C., handgun ban, the court allowed that governments have a right to protect public safety, especially when guns are used outside the home.

In fact, Chicago is rewriting its law right now, and could establish a database for all guns sold in the city or limit the number of handguns an individual can possess. State prohibitions on concealed weapons, like one in Illinois, are not a slam-dunk for overturning either. (Voters in Winnebago County spoke out loudly against allowing concealed carry in an advisory referendum in 2008.) And no one is challenging the role of the ATF in cracking down on the illegal sale and trade of firearms.

http://www.rrstar.com/opinions/x41612330/Our-View-Court-ruli...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Dealing With Gun Hating IDIOTS

On Facebook the group TheForum2012. People who believe in the Constitution really need to join up. Its not my group, but I was ask to join by a member because Im pro 2nd Amendment.
I have been telling Libs if they really believe in their convictions on Gun Free Zones to please put a sign in their yards..(funny..they refuse)
Myself, and others who are pointing out fact, laws and so on, are being called Satanist,NAZI's, Un-American-Pro Murder and so on down the line. So please...check it out. Thanks

I believe in Hope & Change..I Hope the government will Change
Spindale-Rutherford County-North Carolina

The 2A is NOT a right.

It is a prohibition of gov't infringement on a right.

But, yeah, it (the right to bear arms) is equal among other the fundamental rights. (Infringement on any of them is denial of liberty.)

The lawyers do like to play games with words.

A little peaceful civil disobedience is needed

http://www.dailypaul.com/271474/nj-mayors-gestapo-snitch-cou...

Let's harass - via peaceful means - these gun grabbers.

______
"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

read that opinion again. they say it is not a LESSER right...

and they strike down the gun control law banning guns in Chicago, but still say it is not absolute, so Chicago will try again.

Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesnt want to hear -RonPaul

ditto..

...

Title needs to be changed - It is inaccurate....

...

we will just cut off your smallest finger

you really don't need it, you still have your hand and all the rest of your fingers, you can work, write, eat, play sports etc.

It turns out, that you really don't need your ring finger anymore, it's mainly used for getting married, and people aren't getting married any more, so we will just cut that off. You can still eat, do some work, play video games, write, work and play most sports.

It turns out and after much thought, that your middle finger has to go, the only real use for that finger is to flip people off. We will have to cut it off. You can still eat with your remaining fingers, you can still text, pay some games, you can write, and do some limited work.

We decided that all fingers are bad, we are sorry but we have to eliminate them, you can still pull a trigger on a gun and that means you can still fight a tyrannical Goverment, we can't have that, but we'll leave your thumb so you can still suck on it.

Another nail in the coffin. Let Detriot follow. Let them rot.

It's better nature reclaim those wastelands.

New York city truly has it different. They can ban everything down to pea shooters and they just keep CRAMMING IN THE COPS. Cops in SWAT gear ALL FREAKING OVER THE PLACE, they got that island literally DRIPPING WITH AUTOMATIC WEAPONS. Everyplace people with money go. For the rest of it they got "stop and frisk" in a huge shakedown operation which helps finance the whole thing.

Detroit in particular, I really want to see them regulate everything down to whatever they haven't yet. Light bulbs, toilet paper, I want to see MORE paperwork and requirements to start a business, I want to see MORE building codes enforced MORE vigorously, I want to see gardens regulated, all publicly displayed artwork licensed and registered, I want to see a regulation that dogs and cats be CLOTHED and I want your kids in your schools 24 hours a day eating only state approved sludge from juicebox containers. And I want to see taxes on every toilet flush. I want to see taxes on all human activity and a tax to pay your taxes.

States rights means we support you in your noble endeavour. And we wish nothing more than for you to depart from us and our ways on your journey, GO FORTH MY WAYWARD SON but above all STAY RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE. Your journey of a thousand miles begins and ends at home, right where you are, stay right where you are and let the rest of us do it our way.

CAUSE WE AIN'T DOING IT YOUR WAY.

Be brave, be brave, the Myan pilot needs no aeroplane.

I don't care what anyone says about my natural rights.

I know that I have them and will take the steps to make sure I can express them, at ALL costs.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Precisely

They're n@tur@l rights for everyone on the pl@net, not just U.S. citizens. Hence the numerous leg@l/mor@l dichotomies.

"Hence the numerous leg@l/mor@l dichotomies."

Could you clarify what you mean by that?

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Posted here and at the RR paper linked

A 2nd Amendment argument you can share with anyone!

"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."

The second amendment quoted above is clear, punctuated by its closing independent clause.

Let us first settle the grammatical debate;
A debate over this amendment has been whether the first part of the
sentence, "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of
a free State," is a restrictive clause or a subordinate clause, with
respect to the independent clause containing the subject of the
sentence, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed.
*Please see exchange Schluman to Copperud from provided source below.

Schulman: As a "scientific control" on this analysis, I would
also appreciate it if you could compare your analysis of the text of the
Second Amendment to the following sentence,

"A well-schooled electorate, being necessary to the security of a
free State, the right of the people to keep and read Books, shall not
be infringed."

My questions for the usage analysis of this sentence would be:

(1) Is the grammatical structure and usage of this sentence, and the
way the words modify each other, identical to the Second Amendment's
sentence?

(2) Could this sentence be interpreted to restrict "the right of the
people to keep and read Books" only to "a well-educated electorate"--for
example, registered voters with a high-school diploma?

Copperud:

(1) Your "scientific control" sentence precisely parallels the amendment in grammatical structure.

(2) There is nothing in your sentence that either indicates or implies the possibility of a restricted interpretation.

For more on how to read and defend the etymology, grammatical structure and meaning of the 2nd amendment see;
PRIVATE ARMS AS THE PALLADIUM OF LIBERTY: THE MEANING OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT - Ronald S. Resnick
http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Resnick1.htm

Regardless of your personal feelings on this divisive subject, in an
unprecedented 10 year climate of accelerated civil and personal liberty curtailment, we must all decide if we will live under the rule of law or the rule of men.

The United States Constitution is difficult to amend, some would
contest purposefully. As defined in Article V, the Constitution can be amended in one of two ways. First, amendment can take place by a vote of two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by a ratification of three-fourths of the various state legislatures(ratification by thirty-eight states would be required to ratify an amendment today). This first method of amendment is the only one used to date.

Second, the Constitution might be amended by a Convention called for
this purpose by two-thirds of the state legislatures, if the
Convention's proposed amendments are later ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures.

Because any amendment can be blocked by a mere thirteen states
withholding approval (in either of their two houses), amendments don't come easy.

This is the law of the land.

Recent efforts of law makers and the administration to circumvent the
most basic assurances of US Constitution are a clear violation of the
oath of office of each elected Representative and could be construed as sedition or an act of treason by a reasonable jury.

Politicians should heed caution here as the eyes of the Republic draw
on them to operate within the law. Failure to do so, could very well
cost them their own freedom when hurdles to prosecution of these types
crimes against the US Constitution, and the Republic for which it
stands, are overcome by the people through peaceful means or an
alternative not as appealing.

“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.” ― Henry Ford.

Excellent post. Thank you.

Excellent post. Thank you.

peAce

Liberty = Responsibility

When lawlessness rules the justice system

lawful people will be labelled "anarchists."
Anarchy is "without rulers" and if the rulers deal in lawlessness, the only path to lawfulness if through self-governance.
Chaos is what we have, anarchy would be an improvement.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Yes

when they allow for "reasonable" restrictions they allow for all restrictions because "reasonable" can mean anything.

"Endless money forms the sinews of war." - Cicero, www.freedomshift.blogspot.com