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

Skip to comments.

CNN's Toobin: 'Preposterous' to Believe in 2nd Amend. Right Back at Harvard
NewsBusters.org ^ | 7/15/2009 | Matthew Balan

Posted on 07/15/2009 4:39:53 PM PDT by Pyro7480

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-118 next last
To: Kolokotronis

There are only two types of people, the thinkers, the doer’s and then there is the audience.


81 posted on 07/15/2009 7:19:54 PM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, then writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

You think Toobin is an idiot, the Washington state supreme court claims that the correct procedure for obtaining discovery in a criminal case is to use a public records request rather than relying on the rules of criminal procedure or Brady v. Maryland; at least they did in my case. We’ll see what the U.S. Supreme court has to say about that this fall.


82 posted on 07/15/2009 7:24:57 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

You Know The Drill
Click the Pic
Click Here To Donate

Do Not Resist!

Donate To FR!

Now!


83 posted on 07/15/2009 11:43:17 PM PDT by Brad’s Gramma (BG x 2 (and a heartbeat was heard today....))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

I would like to see a legal ignoramus like Toobin come out to Wisconsin and try to take the guns away from all the Dem gun owners and lovers I know. He would be one very sorry man. Here in Wisconsin there is no debate about the right to own a gun since there are millions of them about equally distributed on both sides of the political line. Toobin onces again demonstrates that it is possible to receive an education and not learn anything.


84 posted on 07/16/2009 4:41:24 AM PDT by driftless2 (for long term happiness, learn how to play the accordion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Hey, Toobin! How does it feel to waste all that money on a Harvard education only to discover they were teaching left wing ideology rather than law?

It’s so simple even us hayseeds can understand. It is a Bill of Rights for PEOPLE — not a Bill of Rights for militias.

Duh...


85 posted on 07/16/2009 4:50:36 AM PDT by Lee'sGhost (Johnny Rico picked the wrong girl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: headstamp 2
"I was under the impression that the 2nd Amendment as it’s part of the original Bill of Rights could not be changed or revoked through the amendment process."

There is nothing that I know if in the constitution that would prohibit lawmakers from repealing the 2nd amendment via a new amendment. However, here is the rub.

The second amendment like the many other amendments concerning individual rights do not grant those rights to us citizens. They merely enumerate (basically publicly declare or make known) a pre-existing right. The rights outlined in the constitution come from your creator, not the government. Hence the government cannot take them away. Theoretically, the government could pass a law banning all firearms, but they would be in violation of the natural rights of mankind.
86 posted on 07/16/2009 4:51:20 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Personal Responsibility
"I am not a fan of guns. Hate them, actually."

I'm trying to understand this attitude, seriously. How can you hate an inanimate object? I might say I love my guns or something like that, but I don't truly love them. I love freedom and that's what guns represent to me. Even if someone very near and dear to you was murdered by a gun, that would still not be a reason to hate guns.

I have had loved ones killed from alcohol and autos. It would be like me hating alcohol or cars. It does not make sense to hate or blame inanimate objects for the actions of people.
87 posted on 07/16/2009 4:58:51 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

“Isn’t it just a bit irrational to hate inanimate objects? It’s sort of like hating rocks, isn’t it? “

I was thinking hammer. It is a tool but in the wrong hands can and has killed.


88 posted on 07/16/2009 5:11:54 AM PDT by billhilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA
Well, they do try. they twist the "militia" clause around to mean more than it does while completely dropping the "Right of the PEOPLE" part.

We need to stop being nice to them. Through their blatantly CRIMINAL actions (see Title 18 Sect 242) they are trying to enslave us.

I take a bit of offense to that notion...

89 posted on 07/16/2009 6:00:19 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (III)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

If it was ONLY about militias, why was it an amendment, and not in a clause specifically about the states (specifically Article IV)?: “Section 1. Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

Section 2. The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.

A person charged in any state with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another state, shall on demand of the executive authority of the state from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the state having jurisdiction of the crime.

No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

Section 3. New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.

The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular state.

Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.”


90 posted on 07/16/2009 7:56:53 AM PDT by PghBaldy (http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/06/president-obama-visits-wounded-troops.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: facedown; muir_redwoods
BATFE estimated 215 million guns in 1999

And they've been running about 10 million "Form 4473"background checks for firearms transfers every year since then.

Of that 10 million, some are for transfers of "used" (already existing) firearms; some are for multiple purchases of new firearms. It's also my understanding that holders of Concealed Carry permits can buy without an additional background check.

The number of firearms in private hands is probably closer to 350 million.

91 posted on 07/16/2009 7:57:48 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
The second amendment is as much a right as the 1st

the way this administrunz(*) is going, they are, with help, laughably, from the MSM, eliminating the 1st, first.

(*strunz is Italian for turd)

92 posted on 07/16/2009 7:59:15 AM PDT by Vaquero ("an armed society is a polite society" Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

“Bet you anything Toobin lives in a gated community”

Yes, and it reminds me of the utter irony of Ayers threatening to call the police when a conservative journalist showed up on his property to ask questions! I laughed for days at THAT one!


93 posted on 07/16/2009 8:11:02 AM PDT by 1951Boomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

Yep. And those firearms aren’t going ANYWHERE.


94 posted on 07/16/2009 8:12:13 AM PDT by 1951Boomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Double Tap

Yes—rights are just like certain TRUTHS that are “self-evident.” To me, that means that they cannot be argued or legislated out of existence. Rather, they are the FOUNDATION for any other laws.


95 posted on 07/16/2009 8:17:15 AM PDT by 1951Boomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

“Penumbras and emanations”


96 posted on 07/16/2009 8:20:47 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: WayneS
This man is either ignorant, stupid or he is a bald-faced liar.

I vote for (d), all of the above!!!

He's a liberal & an educated jack ass. Liberals are mentally deranged & genetically deficient, as they inherently hate the U.S., Israel and anything that smacks of Christianity. Their entire world view & immoral reprobate behavior is built around this hatred.
.

97 posted on 07/16/2009 8:26:41 AM PDT by rcrngroup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: fkabuckeyesrule

He is so liberal he thinks prisons should be uni-sex.


98 posted on 07/16/2009 8:27:53 AM PDT by junta (I am the son of Yacub, who for one welcomes my new overlord Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: AU72
Proving William F. Buckley’s statement that he would rather be governed by those in the first page of the Boston Phone Book than the entire Harvard Faculty.

What a great quote and entirely true!!!
.

99 posted on 07/16/2009 8:28:36 AM PDT by rcrngroup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

I argued for an individual right in moot court in law school. I ended up winning in one particular round where the Con Law professor who was judging said, “Good argument, even though no court will ever find in favor of the side you were arguing.” Idiot.


100 posted on 07/16/2009 9:20:10 AM PDT by Texas Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-118 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