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

Skip to comments.

Justice Breyer’s remarks on guns revisionist thinking
Bowling Green Daily News (Ky) ^ | December 14, 2010 | Masthead Editorial

Posted on 12/16/2010 10:07:01 PM PST by neverdem

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is an ideologue, a judicial activist who rules by his own political and personal philosophy, rather than the rule of law and what our founding fathers intended when they wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights more than 200 years ago.

The left-leaning justice recently made remarks that further the suspicion that has been held for years - he doesn’t rule in regard to the Constitution, but rather a far-left political philosophy.

On Sunday, Breyer, a Bill Clinton appointee, said the founding fathers never intended guns to go unregulated.

Breyer said history stands with the dissenters in the court’s decision to overturn the Washington, D.C., handgun ban in 2008 case “D.C. v. Heller.”

Language in the Heller decision,however, acknowledged the constitutionality of some restrictions on guns.

Breyer wrote the dissent and was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsberg. He said historians would side with him in the case because they have concluded that founding father James Madison was more worried that the Constitution might not be ratified than he was about granting individuals the right to bear arms.

Mr. Breyer, you couldn’t be more wrong. Breyer even went on to ask: “What is the scope of the right to keep and bear arms? Machine guns, torpedoes? Handguns?”

There are limitations on the right to keep and bear arms just as their are limitations on freedom of speech and of the press, as well as other rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

Madison, along with other patriot founders of our nation had something very compelling reasons for protecting the right to keep and bear arms.

Perhaps Mr. Breyer should look at the murder rate in the nation’s capital - many were killed because of the handgun ban. The city of Chicago and several other large cities that ban handguns also see very high murder rates, many people would likely still be alive today if they had the right to possess a handgun in those cities, as the founders intended, to defend themselves.

Mr. Breyer seems to be engaged in an exercise of revisionist history.

It is unlikely that the former 13 colonies would have ratified the Constitution without the inclusion of the Bill of Rights, which included the Second Amendment.

The 13 former colonies had recently secured their independence after a protracted and bloody struggle against British tyranny.

A laundry list of grievances against the British crown and Parliament as outlined in the Declaration of Independence is insightful.

Given a genuine concern that they might exchange one government that ran roughshod over their rights for another, the insistence on the inclusion of the Bill of Rights as a condition of ratification is hardly surprising.

Americans of that day were well aware of the important role of an armed citizenry at Lexington and Concord at the dawn of the revolution.

Moreover, Americans relied on their guns to protect their homes and settlements during the French and Indian wars.

During the revolution, settlers had to depend on their guns for protection against marauding bands of Indians incited by the British.

Perhaps Breyer should read the account of the siege of Fort Boonesborough in our own state of Kentucky.

But perhaps not, since Breyer seems more partial to history of the revisionist variety.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: banglist; breyer; stephenbreyer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

1 posted on 12/16/2010 10:07:07 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Justice Breyer’s remarks on guns revisionist thinking

I don't know....."thinking" might be a little too strong.

2 posted on 12/16/2010 10:10:17 PM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It is amazing how leftists, even on the Supreme Court, have little understanding of our county’s real history. Even a cursory reading of the history of the Revolutionary and early Republic periods shows that guns were extremely important.


3 posted on 12/16/2010 10:13:48 PM PST by Inyo-Mono (Had God not driven man from the Garden of Eden the Sierra Club surely would have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Gee,I never have seen that in the 2nd amendment so I guess he has a daily talk with Mr.Madison.How cocky can a prick get in the court trying to challenge the Founders?
4 posted on 12/16/2010 10:15:50 PM PST by taxtruth (Don't end the fed,jail the fed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." --James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46

"The right of the people to keep and bear ... arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country ..." -- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

5 posted on 12/16/2010 10:22:29 PM PST by americanophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Bingo! Nice picks!


6 posted on 12/16/2010 10:34:15 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

“The right of the people to keep and bear ... arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country ...” — James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

Given that our arms are quite infringed/restricted, and most people would argue that is for the best (try taking your gun into a school or university and then arguing that you have the Constitutional right to do so), it stands to reason that either a) America is not using its best/most-natural defense, OR b) America is not [in reality] a free country.

More and more I am inclined to believe that ‘b’ is the true answer.


7 posted on 12/16/2010 10:35:44 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Indeed.


8 posted on 12/16/2010 10:40:11 PM PST by americanophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
When the Constitution was written, "well regulated" meant "well provisioned." Breyer is an assh*le, because he knows this to be true, and he lies to further his radical agenda. He should have his neck stretched after being found guilty of Treason before a jury of his betters.

;-\

9 posted on 12/16/2010 10:51:17 PM PST by Gargantua (Palin ~ Bachmann 2012... cuz "Pa-Bach's a bitch!" (if you're a Liberal or a PDS snart))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Demagogs argue that (1)’The right of the people to to keep and bear arms ...’ is buried into or preceded or defined by (2)’A well regulated militia composed of the body of the people...’. These people dismiss/deny that (1) actually by Madison’s construction(which I believe was deliberate) precedes (2) and defines which is paramount i.e.(1) and which should have results of (2).


10 posted on 12/16/2010 11:51:03 PM PST by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Demagogs argue that (1)’The right of the people to to keep and bear arms ...’ is buried into or preceded or defined by (2)’A well regulated militia composed of the body of the people...’. These people dismiss/deny that (1) actually by Madison’s construction(which I believe was deliberate) precedes (2) and defines which is paramount i.e.(1) and which should have results of (2).


11 posted on 12/16/2010 11:51:19 PM PST by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
I had the (mis)fortune of sitting next to Justice Breyer at an event this year. He not only interrupted and basically co-oped the speakers discussion for himself, but also kept looking over at me to obviously get either my attention or to see if I was positively responding to him. (I am a much younger and —most likely to him as all he probably sees is the unfortunate looking, dreary, depressive liberal women—attractive woman.)

He struck me as an obvious narcissist and quite taken with himself and his lamo logic and studies. I can't imagine he would let a ‘little thing’ such as the constitution get in the way of his rulings and opinions.

12 posted on 12/17/2010 12:38:07 AM PST by GOP Poet (Obama is an OLYMPIC failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOP Poet

By the way the topic of the presentation I attended was NOT in Justice Breyer’s area of expertise (not even close!). Yet this did not stop him from talking the entire time about his point of view regarding the subject matter. What a self centered bore he was. Although he was positively enthusiastic about his own thoughts!! The speaker’s when he was given the opportunity to talk . . . not so much.


13 posted on 12/17/2010 12:44:52 AM PST by GOP Poet (Obama is an OLYMPIC failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
...than he was about granting individuals the right to bear arms.
Any Supreme Court justice who would use the term granting with regard to our rights should be immediately impeached for that alone.
14 posted on 12/17/2010 12:48:02 AM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The best analysis/opinion I’ve heard on this was by Mark Levin. I don’t know if it is on his site, but if it is, it is worth listening to.


15 posted on 12/17/2010 1:16:13 AM PST by KarenMarie (NEVER believe anything coming out of DC until it's been denied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxtruth
He is right. The Founding Fathers would have wanted our citizenry to have arms that were well regulated. By this, they would have meant "made regular"--as in, sighted in properly--and with proper regulations, such as provisions for protecting the rights of The People to own arms such as muskets, pistols, rifles, cannons, etc.

Note that it was New York that provided Mr. Bevier with his cannon.

16 posted on 12/17/2010 2:36:19 AM PST by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bob
Any Supreme Court justice who would use the term granting with regard to our rights should be immediately impeached for that alone.

Agreed. Will you be calling to request initiation of the process?

17 posted on 12/17/2010 2:37:53 AM PST by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; LS
. He said historians would side with him

He's right cause historians are mostly libtarded morons like himself. Pinged historians not included. ;p

18 posted on 12/17/2010 3:05:29 AM PST by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Follow the liberal "logic" of Justice Breyer. Which statement below do you think would flip out the left?

========================================================================

If you have such a problem withe local or state laws, just go to another state to get your guns!

_________________________________________________________________________

If you have such a problem withe local or state laws, just go to another state to get your abortion!

19 posted on 12/17/2010 3:37:38 AM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOP Poet
What a self centered bore he was.

Breyer was appointed by a self-centered bore who seldom closes his mouth.

20 posted on 12/17/2010 4:34:18 AM PST by IbJensen ("How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think"-A. Hitler)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

Priceless!


21 posted on 12/17/2010 4:36:15 AM PST by IbJensen ("How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think"-A. Hitler)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; All
Breyer, a Bill Clinton appointee, said the founding fathers never intended guns to go unregulated.

Then why did they use the words "shall not be infringed"?
22 posted on 12/17/2010 5:00:38 AM PST by Red in Blue PA (Planning on using 911? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

Perfect!


23 posted on 12/17/2010 5:02:55 AM PST by Red in Blue PA (Planning on using 911? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Impy

I’m not even sure about that. You have a lot of pro-gun historians, including Joyce Appelby, Stephen Halbrook, etc.


24 posted on 12/17/2010 5:32:48 AM PST by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually." (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The single most important duty a president has is appointing judges.


25 posted on 12/17/2010 5:44:53 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gargantua; neverdem

>>When the Constitution was written, “well regulated” meant “well provisioned.”

Actually, the explanation below rings most true to me. From my FR profile page:

The term “regulated” applied to clocks means “accurate in keeping time”. It made sense, particularly in 18th Century armies, to have to pay a lot of attention to how well soldiers could operate in massed formations. Soldiers had to be drilled to load, aim, and fire as one unit. You do NOT want the rifle next to you to be firing (and emitting a shower of sparks) while you are pouring gunpowder into your musket. Everybody had to do every step together with no screwups.


26 posted on 12/17/2010 5:49:12 AM PST by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GOP Poet
(I am a much younger and —most likely to him as all he probably sees is the unfortunate looking, dreary, depressive liberal women—attractive woman.)

Aw, come on! How can you say a thing like that with those three hotties on the court!

27 posted on 12/17/2010 6:00:08 AM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: harpseal; TexasCowboy; nunya bidness; AAABEST; Travis McGee; Squantos; wku man; SLB; ...
"Domestic Enemies" ping.

Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!

28 posted on 12/17/2010 6:10:51 AM PST by Joe Brower (Sheep have three speeds: "graze", "stampede" and "cower".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

After making such public statements as these on the Second Amendment, should he not be forced to recuse himself from any cases involving that subject????


29 posted on 12/17/2010 6:27:20 AM PST by ZULU (No nation which tried to tolerate Islam escaped Islamization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basil

ping for later reading


30 posted on 12/17/2010 6:34:12 AM PST by basil (It's time to rid the country of "Gun Free Zones" aka "Killing Fields")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
We seem to forget that the Bill of Rights gives us nothing. The Bill of rights is for the government to read and comply with. “Congress shall make no law..”, “ shall not be infringed.”, etc. We have these rights as citizens, not because the government gives them to us.

Until the elected are reminded of this, we must keep our arms ready. We fought a revolution against a much less abusing government than we now have controlling us.

Wake up America an smell the gunpowder.

31 posted on 12/17/2010 6:42:27 AM PST by Big Mack (I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain to eat VEGETABLES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
That's truly wonderful, but that doesn't change the FACT that, when the Constitution was written, “well regulated” meant “well provisioned.”

The Constitution really says, "The presence of a well-stocked militia being necessary to guarantee a free and prosperous people, the right of the people to keep and carry weapons shall not be infringed."

As long as it's a law abiding citizen, he can have chain-guns, rocket-propelled grenades, heat-seeking missiles, suitcase nukes, Abrahms Tanks, whatever he wants to own, maintain and use to stay safe and free.

Period. That's what the Constitution says.

8^D

32 posted on 12/17/2010 6:47:19 AM PST by Gargantua (Palin ~ Bachmann 2012... cuz "Pa-Bach's a bitch!" (if you're a Liberal or a PDS snart))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
Only if they had any interest at all in being ethical, logical, or law abiding.

One of our biggest mistakes is in thinking that the "other side" wants to play by the rules or will do things logically. They know that doesn't work for them. They don't feel shame like we do. They can justify/excuse damn near anything if it allows them to achieve their goals.

33 posted on 12/17/2010 6:58:38 AM PST by Dead Corpse (III%. The last line in the sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

We should line both sides of the Capitol Mall with gallows to accommodate those of our ‘public servants’ who stand in violation of their oaths of office. Each and every one of them.


34 posted on 12/17/2010 7:26:38 AM PST by Noumenon ("We should forgive our enemies, but not before they are hanged.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
On Sunday, Breyer, a Bill Clinton appointee, said the founding fathers never intended guns to go unregulated.

The only way to determine the intentions of the Founding Fathers is to read their published discourses and private letters. A great example is the Federalist papers, specifically Federalist #46. I make all my students in Advanced Placement American Government do an exhaustive research paper on these papers, especially #46!

I'd like this "Justice" to show me EXACTLY where in any of the Framers letters or articles this was provided for absent the actual wording of the 2nd Amendment, because to fall back on the "well regulated" verbiage is a tired ruse. "Well Regulated" is not a legal term of art, but rather one of military logistics for similar arms of similar calibers for the ease of resupply. Well Regulated might mean well disciplined as well in the sense of being good in the gentle art of war. But it certainly has nothing to do with government levels of gun control. This guy is clearly an idiot. It just proves that leftists, in a battle of wits with a conservative come to do battle, essentially unarmed.

35 posted on 12/17/2010 7:51:33 AM PST by ExSoldier (Life without God is like an unsharpened pencil: It has no point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxtruth

I saw that interview with Breyer. What an arrogant idiot. Like he channels Madison. What part of “The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed” does Breyer not understand? Just another progressive activist.


36 posted on 12/17/2010 8:04:19 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

What is the scope of the right to bear arms? Everything and anything. From a .22 you can hang on a necklace to a howitzer in your back yard.


37 posted on 12/17/2010 8:15:31 AM PST by wastedyears (It has nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
He's violating his oath to uphold the Constitution. On the contrary, he is hell bent on destroying it and he openly admits to it.

Impeach the treacherous bastard and remove him from office. That's what a real American Congress would do!

38 posted on 12/17/2010 8:34:06 AM PST by Gritty (Washington no longer has a government; rather, it has a gangster regime - Jeffrey Kuhner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOP Poet

>>(I am a much younger and —most likely to him as all he probably sees is the unfortunate looking, dreary, depressive liberal women—attractive woman.)<<

And the rumor on FR is that you still have that cute wiggle when you walk. Care to confirm this rumor?


39 posted on 12/17/2010 9:10:36 AM PST by B4Ranch (Do NOT remain seated until this ride comes to a full and complete stop! We're going the wrong way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The Comedian

Ping.


40 posted on 12/17/2010 9:21:31 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals;
- The Address and Reasons of Dissent of the Minority of the Convention of Pennsylvania to their Constituents, December 12, 1787

41 posted on 12/17/2010 11:05:16 AM PST by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quix; Whenifhow; houeto; null and void; Squantos; xrmusn; bronxville; Screaming_Gerbil; ...
Look-what's-squatting-on-the-Supreme-Court ping.

(Thanks DuncanWaring for the ping!)

"Enemies Domestic" ping.

Increasing volume ping list monitoring the Leftist/government axis agitprop, psyops, and instigation of violence.

FReepmail me if you want on or off The Comedian's "Enemies Domestic" ping list...


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

42 posted on 12/17/2010 12:42:44 PM PST by The Comedian (Government: Saving people from freedom since time immemorial.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The Founders never intended arms to be unregulated but they just never got around to doing it??


43 posted on 12/17/2010 3:12:55 PM PST by Eagle Eye (A blind clock finds a nut at least twice a day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
“What is the scope of the right to keep and bear arms?"

That's easy. Any weapon that can be carried by an infantryman including crew served machine guns is covered by the 2nd Amendment.

44 posted on 12/17/2010 4:11:55 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Islam is the religion of Satan and Mohammed was his minion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
lol. sure. i'll confirm. ;-) (at least i think i feel something a goin' side to side back there). hope it is a swinging till the day I die though.
45 posted on 12/17/2010 4:48:50 PM PST by GOP Poet (Obama is an OLYMPIC failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Justice Bryer peddles the notion of a ‘living constitution’, code words for it says what he wants it to say. A morally bankrupt belief as our document provides a mechanism for changes to keep it evergreen which does not include the participation of SCOTUS.

We seriously need judicial reform so we can get justices on the bench who can read and comprehend our supreme law of the land that was written in plain and straight forward english for a reason.

This Bryer guy is nothing but a tyrant in a robe.


46 posted on 12/17/2010 7:44:03 PM PST by dajeeps
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Comedian

squatting ??? only if he has to pee...


47 posted on 12/17/2010 8:10:44 PM PST by Gilbo_3 (Gov is not reason; not eloquent; its force.Like fire,a dangerous servant & master. George Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
Aw, come on! How can you say a thing like that with those three hotties on the court!

lol. Good point! How can !?

48 posted on 12/17/2010 10:32:15 PM PST by GOP Poet (Obama is an OLYMPIC failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Gargantua
The Constitution doesn't say anything about the right to bear arms being limited to "law abiding citizens". It says "the people". If you're going to talk about what the Constitution "really" means, try not to make stuff up along the way.
49 posted on 12/18/2010 5:42:11 AM PST by Bellows
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
Any weapon that can be carried by an infantryman including crew served machine guns is covered by the 2nd Amendment.

The Constitution doesn't limit the right to bear arms to "any weapon that can be carried by an infantryman". Saying that this must be what the Founding Fathers intended, when they easily could have said exactly that if they'd wanted to (but didn't), isn't any different from any other crackpot interpretation that finds no support in the language of the 2A itself.
50 posted on 12/18/2010 5:49:47 AM PST by Bellows
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 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