Posted on 10/07/2015 6:26:33 AM PDT by PROCON
In August, my colleague Charlie Cooke wrote an epic rant daring the Left to stop talking about repealing the Second Amendment and start doing it. Introduce the repeal to Congress, work it through the states, and tell the American people what you want to do — take from them a fundamental, enumerated right from the Bill of Rights. As Charlie eloquently outlines, repealing the Second Amendment is an impossible task. Even worse for the Left, it’s political suicide.
But if the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges teaches us anything, it’s that the age of judicial supremacy means that five justices can amend the Constitution far more efficiently than Congress and the state legislatures. And right now there are clearly four Supreme Court justices who are committed to the absurd view that the operative clause of the Second Amendment — “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” — doesn’t actually mean “the right of the people” and therefore doesn’t encompass an individual right to own a weapon, even for self-defense. This view defies history yet is received, conventional wisdom on the judicial Left, in much the same way that it’s received, conventional wisdom that the Constitution actually protects rights to abortion and gay marriage.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Their point is to redefine the words of the 2ndA so it can be rendered meaningless - no need to repeal if “the people” is somehow defined as “the US government” and not the subjects thereof, and “infringed” doesn’t include “reasonable restrictions” like choking off the supply chain (no imports, rigorous registration, absurd insurance requirements, etc).
Remember, NFA (strict registration & $200 taxation of “exotic” weapons) and 922(o) (outright ban on post-1986 machineguns) still stands. So long as they’re not repealed, the Left can hope to expand those longstanding laws so NFA include _all_ guns, transfer taxes raised thru the roof ($200 now is equivalent to like $8000 when NFA was enacted), if not banned outright.
The biggest mistake our side is making in all this is holding to the “FMCDH” attitude and no farther. Fine, keep yours ... they’ll just make it nearly impossible to sell it legally ($5000 transfer tax anyone?), paperwork may be easily avoided but will catch up to you should the item _ever_ be noticed by authorities, penalties severe (10 years prison & quarter-million$ fine), and most of all the supply chain cut off for imports of completed items & parts.
Shazamm! Never knew that SCOTUS could repeal the BOR!
To quote Andrew Jackson, “The justices have made their decision. Now let them enforce it.”
……..As opposed to the Pro-oppression (Leftist) side of the aisle…….
When I say I’m getting real close to not giving a flying fornication (pardon the bad language) of what the Extreme Court says about the disposition of our God-given and Constitutionally affirmed Civil-Rights. The founding father recognized that it’s the people who make the ultimate decisions on these matters, and at some point the People are going to reply the phrase ‘screw-you’ (or some variation thereof) to the Extreme Court and that will be it for their power base.
If they keep on rewriting the rule of law to suit the passions of the present day without regard to the foundational principles that made this country the greatest in the world, they will have written themselves off as irrelevant and we the people will simple ignore their edicts.
Those were achieved by
- acknowledging Congress may levy taxes, and issue tax credits for particular behavior (say, you’re taxed $X but get $Y credit in taxes for mortgage interest or having health insurance)
- acknowledging “equal protection” (i.e.: equal treatment) in light of long-accepted prohibitions regarding “orientation” discrimination.
Alas, these are well-established judicial principles - and those who know the law well enough can bend principles to their own strange goals.
“consent of the governed”. His authority “can be removed with only a pen and a cell phone” (see history of “committees of correspondence”).
They can re-interpret the wording into oblivion. “Well-regulated”, “infringed”, even “the people” have new definitions (to wit: “licensed subject to micro-management”, “limited, reasonable restrictions excepted”, and “government agents acting on behalf of the subject population”) which are widely accepted, when applied would render 2ndA meaningless.
Agreed. The Second Amendment will not be "repealed" by redefining words in the Supreme Court. That power grab could trigger a second Civil War, but it could not revoke our God-given individual right to keep and bear arms. I hope we will be able to avoid or at least delay that bloodshed, but liberals seem eager to fight against free Americans.
They can’t ban ammo (akin to infringing on “freedom of press” by allowing possession of printers but prohibiting power cords). What they CAN do is demand accountability & taxation of every single round manufactured, purchased, and expended (by individual serial number, one form per event).
Focus on the supply chain, folks. They’re not going to “come for your guns”, they’re going to throttle the businesses involved in manufacturing, selling, repairing, and feeding those guns - and include individual activity in the umbrella of such “business”.
National Review is a conservative publication. It was founded by William F Buckley back in the day, and has been one of the original conservative magazine for decades. You are probably thinking of The Nation, which is a lefty rag.
Mind you there are some around here who consider National Review not conservative because it does not tow certain lines (like liking Trump).
We have inherent human rights that are spelled out in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights does not grant our rights, it lists them. No judge or court has the legitimate power to deny us those rights. Any attempt to do so will be met with violence.
There is no Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland.
I think you mean Humpty-Dumpty.
Slavery was eradicated not by Lincoln, but by constitutional amendment.
An Article V convention can overturn Obergefell, Roe and other despotic decisions.
It is our only hope. There is little time.
They already banned smuggling drugs...right???
I stand corrected
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master— that’s all.”
7:1 for regular military versus guerrilla force to achieve parity.
Cave man discovered fire- it’s the original equalizer.
Internet goes dark and news services start spouting rubbish, something has hatched.
There is nothing conservative about the Nat Rev.
It’s libertarian. Buckley was a huge libertarian and since his death, the magazine has moved even further left.
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.