Ben Cartwright SASS
NES Member
Isn't that the Declaration of Independence? No legal standing
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS February Giveaway ***Canik TP9SF Elite***
John Paul Stevens is a retired associate justice of the United States Supreme Court.
Isn't that the Declaration of Independence? No legal standing
Do you also want it with the shoulder thing that goes up and a barrel shroud? Those are extra killy.NOT ME, I WANT A FULLY SEMI-AUTOMATIC MUSKET
Terrorist!
Don't worry - any day now we'll never have to hear from him again.
his assessment that the only legitimate gun control action would be a Constitutional Amendment is spot on.
If the Constitution is amended over it, there will be another Civil War.
He may be a Constitutionalist but he doesn’t like the Second Amendment and wants it repealedActually, he's a Constitutionalist. His motive notwithstanding, his assessment that the only legitimate gun control action would be a Constitutional Amendment is spot on.
This modern gun debate is a Constitutional Crisis, the likes of which we haven't had since the Civil War. If the Constitution is amended over it, there will be another Civil War.
...and this is precisely why, if shit starts getting heavy, there is no remedy other than partition. And shit could very well start getting heavy.Lets just say for a minute that they do. Total gun ban... who is gonna come and get them? Sure, there are some folks that will just hand them over, but who is gonna go knocking on doors in say... Dutch Harbor Alaska? How about Tifton Georgia or Bangyersista Kentucky?
Good f***in luck with that kid. And in most of rural "Merica, local law enforcement is going to tell you to pound sand. So now you are talking about sending in the Feds?
These morons have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. You would be looking at slaughtering large numbers of Americans, and I don't think they have the stomach or the balls for it.
if the 2nd doesn't apply to modern firearms then the 1st doesn't apply to modern communication devices (internet, phones, radios, etc) or MODERN religions (bye bye LDS (1830) and Jehovah's Witnesses (1870)) and definitely bye bye Scientology. Hmmmm... what else can we get rid of by repealing amendments?
Since the Second Amendment did not create or grant any right concerning firearms, the right enumerated in the Amendment has to be an existing right separate from the Amendment. Thus, repealing the Second Amendment would not eliminate any right because the right enumerated in the Amendment was not created by the Amendment. The right to keep and bear arms exists independent of the Constitution or the Second Amendment.
While the Declaration of Independence is wonderful, it is not the charter for our government. It's merely a break-up letter to England. If the drafting of a 28th amendment and it's ratification were to repeal the 2nd, that would be it. The unconstitutional becomes constitutional. That is the only correct interpretation of the Constitution being a living document. Through the amendment process there is no section that is beyond reproach. The only thing protecting it is the vast majority of opinion. Thus, completely idiotic ideas make it into the Constitution, such as the 17th and 18th amendments.This might ring a bell:
Not suggesting or recommending it. Just pointing out that the DoI and C both acknowledge that they protect us, not subject us.
"For over 200 years after the adoption of the Second Amendment, it was uniformly understood as not placing any limit on either federal or state authority to enact gun control legislation. In 1939 the Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress could prohibit the possession of a sawed-off shotgun because that weapon had no reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a “well regulated militia.”
It was uniformly understood by oppressive government officials....not by free thinking Americans. Isn't it strange the exact items the founding fathers said were off the table for the government are the exact freedoms they attack.
"During the years when Warren Burger was our chief justice, from 1969 to 1986, no judge, federal or state, as far as I am aware, expressed any doubt as to the limited coverage of that amendment. When organizations like the National Rifle Association disagreed with that position and began their campaign claiming that federal regulation of firearms curtailed Second Amendment rights, Chief Justice Burger publicly characterized the N.R.A. as perpetrating “one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”
An organization telling people who live in a free society that their rights are being infringed by the government is "fraud". Telling people to go out and exercise your constitutional freedoms is somehow fraud....coming from a government official.....let that sink in...
Burger is/was wrong and Stevens is an idiot.....The Second Amendment guarantees that a citizen's right to keep and bear arms has no limitations.
My lawyer, (now retired,) said that 2A was a collective right.
I said, “So your saying the founders actually thought it necessary to enumerate that the military could have guns?”
I loved discussing stuff with him.
While the Declaration of Independence is wonderful, it is not the charter for our government. It's merely a break-up letter to England. If the drafting of a 28th amendment and it's ratification were to repeal the 2nd, that would be it. The unconstitutional becomes constitutional. That is the only correct interpretation of the Constitution being a living document. Through the amendment process there is no section that is beyond reproach. The only thing protecting it is the vast majority of opinion. Thus, completely idiotic ideas make it into the Constitution, such as the 17th and 18th amendments.