imyoda
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 6, 2012
- Messages
- 5,731
- Reaction score
- 1,025
- Location
- Sarasota, Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The second civil war will occur if the progressives try to kill the Second Amendment.
Why the Next Supreme Court Is Poised to Roll Back Gun Rights - The Daily Beast
Why the Next Supreme Court Is Poised to Roll Back Gun Rights
Nuts like the NRA have advanced a radical interpretation of the Second Amendment for the past few decades, but politics and legal thinking signal a return to traditional jurisprudence. Remember that the NRA’s understanding of the Second Amendment is an extremely recent phenomenon. For more than 200 years, the legal and scholarly consensus was that, in the absence of a standing army, the Second Amendment was designed to enable states and localities to maintain a “well-regulated militia” by placing muskets and other weapons in the hands of local citizens………..
Then came three decades of conservative political activism, focused on law schools, the National Rifle Association, and conservative think tanks. This effort culminated (but by no means concluded) with the 2008 case of D.C. v. Heller, which the Supreme Court found, for the first time, an individual right to gun ownership in the Second Amendment………..
ALSO SEE:
How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment - POLITICO Magazine
Things go up…….things go down……
And a new court, without a full number of justices, has signaled a changing view of the Second Amendment……..
Not to take away the right to own a gun……….
But moreso allow limits state and federal government have to regulate the use and safety measures of regulation………
One only look to the three gun case decisions issued this term…..and the denial to hear some others which affirmed the right to regulate……
Seems the Court has hear the cry from 70-90% of folks for a need to pass some constitutional ways to regulate the safe use of guns and who has a right to own one……
The Daily Beast is where I get all my news.
Why the Next Supreme Court Is Poised to Roll Back Gun Rights - The Daily Beast
Why the Next Supreme Court Is Poised to Roll Back Gun Rights
Nuts like the NRA have advanced a radical interpretation of the Second Amendment for the past few decades, but politics and legal thinking signal a return to traditional jurisprudence. Remember that the NRA’s understanding of the Second Amendment is an extremely recent phenomenon. For more than 200 years, the legal and scholarly consensus was that, in the absence of a standing army, the Second Amendment was designed to enable states and localities to maintain a “well-regulated militia” by placing muskets and other weapons in the hands of local citizens………..
Then came three decades of conservative political activism, focused on law schools, the National Rifle Association, and conservative think tanks. This effort culminated (but by no means concluded) with the 2008 case of D.C. v. Heller, which the Supreme Court found, for the first time, an individual right to gun ownership in the Second Amendment………..
ALSO SEE:
How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment - POLITICO Magazine
Things go up…….things go down……
And a new court, without a full number of justices, has signaled a changing view of the Second Amendment……..
Not to take away the right to own a gun……….
But moreso allow limits state and federal government have to regulate the use and safety measures of regulation………
One only look to the three gun case decisions issued this term…..and the denial to hear some others which affirmed the right to regulate……
Seems the Court has hear the cry from 70-90% of folks for a need to pass some constitutional ways to regulate the safe use of guns and who has a right to own one……
Radical interpretation of the 2nd Amendment? Hmm.... I suppose at the time the Founders were radical. :shrug:
Radical interpretation of the 2nd Amendment? Hmm.... I suppose at the time the Founders were radical. :shrug:
Those words are your words............
There is plenty of room to fully define what the Second Amendment means at law.............
Let's start with what ""A well regulated Militia............."
Catch my drift.......
Wooooooo.....not terribly worried about it. Nice spin though.Why the Next Supreme Court Is Poised to Roll Back Gun Rights - The Daily Beast
Why the Next Supreme Court Is Poised to Roll Back Gun Rights
Nuts like the NRA have advanced a radical interpretation of the Second Amendment for the past few decades, but politics and legal thinking signal a return to traditional jurisprudence. Remember that the NRA’s understanding of the Second Amendment is an extremely recent phenomenon. For more than 200 years, the legal and scholarly consensus was that, in the absence of a standing army, the Second Amendment was designed to enable states and localities to maintain a “well-regulated militia” by placing muskets and other weapons in the hands of local citizens………..
Then came three decades of conservative political activism, focused on law schools, the National Rifle Association, and conservative think tanks. This effort culminated (but by no means concluded) with the 2008 case of D.C. v. Heller, which the Supreme Court found, for the first time, an individual right to gun ownership in the Second Amendment………..
ALSO SEE:
How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment - POLITICO Magazine
Things go up…….things go down……
And a new court, without a full number of justices, has signaled a changing view of the Second Amendment……..
Not to take away the right to own a gun……….
But moreso allow limits state and federal government have to regulate the use and safety measures of regulation………
One only look to the three gun case decisions issued this term…..and the denial to hear some others which affirmed the right to regulate……
Seems the Court has hear the cry from 70-90% of folks for a need to pass some constitutional ways to regulate the safe use of guns and who has a right to own one……
from the article ImYoda was gushing over
That attitude, combined with the unprecedented gerrymandering of the House of Representatives, makes it unlikely that federal legislative action will come any time soon even though a majority of Americans support it.
actually most people do not support the sort of crap ImYoda wants. sure lots of people "support" universal background checks and other feel good things but bans on guns-well look what happened in 94
as to the guy who wrote that nonsense-He's a far left Jewish Gay activist whose articles often whine about middle class conservative Christian Males-the group that the Bannerrhoid movement sees as making up most of the gun owning population. As the National Review article I posted a couple weeks ago notes-the NRA has become a symbol of that democraphic and every movement that sees middle class conservative middle aged Christian males as the enemy, usually adopts gun control as one of their tactics to attack their enemy
Michaelson's rants are not the product of someone who is a serious scholar in second amendment issues but rather a gay activist who sees the NRA as supporting candidates who are hostile to his main political issue-gay rights
Those words are your words............
There is plenty of room to fully define what the Second Amendment means at law.............
Let's start with what ""A well regulated Militia............."
Catch my drift.......
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824
Serious scholar of the 2nd amendment? Is that a degree program courtesy of Trump U or correspondance course from the NRA?
Are ANTI-GUN threads the only thing you make threads about?
Sure seems like it. I do not even read them anymore.
Why the Next Supreme Court Is Poised to Roll Back Gun Rights - The Daily Beast
Why the Next Supreme Court Is Poised to Roll Back Gun Rights
Nuts like the NRA have advanced a radical interpretation of the Second Amendment for the past few decades, but politics and legal thinking signal a return to traditional jurisprudence. Remember that the NRA’s understanding of the Second Amendment is an extremely recent phenomenon. For more than 200 years, the legal and scholarly consensus was that, in the absence of a standing army, the Second Amendment was designed to enable states and localities to maintain a “well-regulated militia” by placing muskets and other weapons in the hands of local citizens………..
Then came three decades of conservative political activism, focused on law schools, the National Rifle Association, and conservative think tanks. This effort culminated (but by no means concluded) with the 2008 case of D.C. v. Heller, which the Supreme Court found, for the first time, an individual right to gun ownership in the Second Amendment………..
ALSO SEE:
How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment - POLITICO Magazine
Things go up…….things go down……
And a new court, without a full number of justices, has signaled a changing view of the Second Amendment……..
Not to take away the right to own a gun……….
But moreso allow limits state and federal government have to regulate the use and safety measures of regulation………
One only look to the three gun case decisions issued this term…..and the denial to hear some others which affirmed the right to regulate……
Seems the Court has hear the cry from 70-90% of folks for a need to pass some constitutional ways to regulate the safe use of guns and who has a right to own one……
Wooooooo.....not terribly worried about it. Nice spin though.
Actually it is a fact that in their time the Founders were considered radicals as they had progressive ideas for their time. Not every colonial fought against the British ya know.
Now, you want to start with the militia clause of the 2nd? That's fine. Don't forget to include the part that says "being necessary to the security of a free state" which explains why the militia clause was added to the 2nd. Also don't forget the other clause in the 2nd that states "the right of the people to keep and bear arms".
Also don't forget to quote the Founders and previous SCOTUS rulings (even before Heller vs DC) that mentioned that the people have a right to own guns and don't forget to state why our Founders believed that people had a right to own guns.
If you can get all that straight then we can have an actual discussion. Until you study up on it though I'm afraid that we'll just be talking in circles and there will be no use to continue this conversation. Here is one place that you can start in your studies...
Any such predictions of the next Court are nonsense. Until the election in Nov., when we will decide who appoints the next Justice, no accurate predictions can be made. Kennedy has sided with gun rights in the past. There is no reason to believe he would do otherwise if another conservative is posted to the Court.
Well there is no reason to be worried..........Constitutional rights will not be changed or violated
I disagree and see it much differently than that
Common sense will prove there is no compelling reason to ban anything. So yes, you are correct. What will change is how mental illness is handled. That is going to open a whole new can of crap.
How do you see them finding a compelling argument to restrict sales of one of the most widely owned firearms in the U.S. That should be interesting.
I disagree and see it much differently than that
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?