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

Skip to comments.

Stanford law prof: Second Amendment is about restricting gun rights
The Daily Caller.com ^ | 1/30/2014 | Robby Soave

Posted on 01/30/2014 8:19:56 AM PST by rktman

A Stanford University law professor took the view that the Second Amendment permits strong gun control, telling the crowd that “restriction has to be at the core” of the right to carry a gun.

John J. Donohue, a member of the Stanford Law School faculty, made his remarks during a debate with attorney Donald Kilmer, an adjunct professor at Lincoln Law School of San Jose.

“I support the right to self-defense,” said Donohue during the debate, according to The Stanford Review. “But that doesn’t mean that you have a right to high-capacity magazines.”

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: didiots; guncontrol; highereducation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last
Comprehension skills.....ZERO Dumbass using the tired argument that the founders never envisioned today's modern weapons. But then again, he is a college professor so he must be real real smart. Either that or he slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
1 posted on 01/30/2014 8:19:56 AM PST by rktman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rktman

2 posted on 01/30/2014 8:21:45 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

And by his logic, censorship is completely constitutional as the founding fathers couldn’t have anticipated the computer and the internet when they wrote the 1st Amendment.


3 posted on 01/30/2014 8:24:40 AM PST by reegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

I was once foolish enough to think that lawyers were pretty sharp.

Thankfully, the Obamadork, the Holderfelon, and multiple “professors of law” have erased that incorrect conclusion.


4 posted on 01/30/2014 8:25:34 AM PST by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

high-capacity magazines = putting more cartridges in the magazine than it will reliably feed.

Otherwise it is standard capacity.


5 posted on 01/30/2014 8:27:55 AM PST by Scrambler Bob ( Concerning bo -- that refers to the president. If I capitalize it, I mean the dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Whenever I want an explanation of the RKBA, I turn to a professor at Stanford (yeah, right.)
6 posted on 01/30/2014 8:28:19 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks ("Say Not the Struggle Naught Availeth.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Try the good old Global Warming fact strategy


7 posted on 01/30/2014 8:29:31 AM PST by molson209 (Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
“But that doesn’t mean that you have a right to high-capacity magazines.”

I guess I missed that part of the 2nd amendment wording. Must have been next to the section where it says the people can only own single shot muzzle loading flintlocks.
8 posted on 01/30/2014 8:31:23 AM PST by PowderMonkey (WILL WORK FOR AMMO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
I enjoyed your review of Savage Continent. I've read that one and Anne Applebaum's Gulag and Iron Curtain. I also recommend Bloodlands. This quartet rounds out the murderous history of the crimes committed by two of the world's worst regimes - all in the service of a corrupt ideology in pursuit of absolute power.

The lesson on offer: there is only one way to stop these monsters and those who enable them. Only one way.

9 posted on 01/30/2014 8:36:11 AM PST by Noumenon (Resistance. Restoration. Retribution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Only a liberal could interpret “shall not be infringed” as advocating control.


10 posted on 01/30/2014 8:37:34 AM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
It makes sense - if you subscribe to the upside down world of liberals, where rights are wrong and wrongs are right.

11 posted on 01/30/2014 8:39:48 AM PST by BitWielder1 (Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
“I support the right to self-defense,” said Donohue during the debate, according to The Stanford Review. “But that doesn’t mean that you have a right to high-capacity magazines.”

So, professor, that means that you do not have the right to be able to defend yourself against multiple assailants, or against government forces armed with high capacity magazines?

12 posted on 01/30/2014 8:42:51 AM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed & water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Comprehension skills.....ZERO Dumbass using the tired argument that the founders never envisioned today's modern weapons.

Exactly!

So, with that thought process do we now restrict the First Amendment because The Founders never envisioned the internet?

13 posted on 01/30/2014 8:42:52 AM PST by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Drop that “eye” phone and step away.


14 posted on 01/30/2014 8:46:03 AM PST by rktman (Under my plan(scheme), the price of EVERYTHING will necessarily skyrocket! Period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Well... Assuming this guy isn’t cut from the same cloth as Michale Bellisiles... Then he is clinically insane.

Of course, if he is, then he’s a fraud and needs to be fired immediately.


15 posted on 01/30/2014 8:46:57 AM PST by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Hi cap magazines.

The Prof should look up when the Puckle gun was invented.


16 posted on 01/30/2014 8:47:59 AM PST by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

LOL! Right. Fire a college prof? Now that’s funny.


17 posted on 01/30/2014 8:48:17 AM PST by rktman (Under my plan(scheme), the price of EVERYTHING will necessarily skyrocket! Period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Everyone should just laugh, in people like these, faces. To actually believe the things they do, they have to deny reality. I can’t say they are “ignorant”, because these are educated people. Another word comes to mind that is perfect.

ASININE

1.
extremely stupid or foolish.
“Lydia ignored his asinine remark”

synonyms: stupid, foolish, brainless, mindless, senseless, idiotic, imbecilic, ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, nonsensical, fatuous, silly, inane, witless, empty-headed; informal, half-witted, dimwitted, dumb, moronic
“an asinine stunt”


18 posted on 01/30/2014 8:50:36 AM PST by faucetman ( Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

I guess we could just set him on fire.

I think the time has come for options to be considered.


19 posted on 01/30/2014 8:51:10 AM PST by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rktman

quote “restriction has to be at the core” of the right to carry a gun”

hm... lets play a game liberals...

lets replace “carry a gun” with “have an abortion” (which isn’t even in the constitution” and see how you feel about such a statement!


20 posted on 01/30/2014 8:51:14 AM PST by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied .. the economy died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
No. XIII of the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776’s Declaration of Rights stated, “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.”

This was not drafted by Jefferson or Madison but by Robert Whitehill, Timothy Matlack, Dr. Thomas Young, George Bryan, James Cannon, and Benjamin Franklin. Jefferson probably copied this document.

There is no ambiguity as to what right to bear arms means in this Pennsylvania Constitution.

21 posted on 01/30/2014 8:53:44 AM PST by x_plus_one (The harvest is great but the workers are few. Salman Rushdie is right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

“I support the right to self-defense,” ...“But that doesn’t mean that you have a right to high-capacity magazines.”

“I support the right to religion,” ...“But that doesn’t mean that you have a right to pray in public.”

“I support the right to free speech,” ...“But that doesn’t mean that you have a right to publicly disagree with Obama.”

“I support the right to work,” ...“But that doesn’t mean that you have a right to not join a union.”

“I support the right to require warrants for searches,” ...“But that doesn’t mean that the state must get the warrant before the search.”

“I support the right of political dissent,” ...“But that doesn’t mean that you have a right to hold positions that I define as misguided.”


22 posted on 01/30/2014 8:54:00 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

““It’s fanciful to think that guns in the hands of citizens acts as a realistic check,” said Donohue. “They’re not really trained to do so. And it’s fanciful to think that the military would ever turn on U.S. citizens.”

Maybe he should ask the Jews of Warsaw if they would have liked to own guns during WW2. Oh, but wait...they died fighting an army with almost nothing to do it with:

“Hundreds of people in the Warsaw ghetto were ready to fight, adults and children, sparsely armed with handguns, gasoline bottles, and a few other weapons that had been smuggled into the Ghetto by resistance fighters. Most of the Jewish fighters did not view their actions as an effective measure by which to save themselves, but rather as a battle for the honor of the Jewish people, and a protest against the world’s silence.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto_Uprising


23 posted on 01/30/2014 8:54:36 AM PST by Mr Rogers (Liberals are like locusts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
Only a liberal could interpret “shall not be infringed” as advocating control.

It's the "well regulated" part that throws them.

24 posted on 01/30/2014 8:58:00 AM PST by Disambiguator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator

In the language of the time, that meant “well equipped.”


25 posted on 01/30/2014 9:05:31 AM PST by Little Ray (How did I end up in this hand-basket, and why is it getting so hot?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Donohue explained that the Second Amendment must be interpreted in historical context. The founding fathers had no idea how powerful–and destructive–today’s weapons would become, he said.

Because the founding fathers were stupid? I can imagine things that could make today's weapons a lot more destructive. I can imagine ray guns. If they wanted to restrict us they would have said "keep and bare flintlocks".

26 posted on 01/30/2014 9:13:46 AM PST by Starstruck (If my reply offends, you probably don't understand sarcasm or criticism...or do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
Only a liberal could interpret “shall not be infringed” as advocating control.

Did he really address “shall not be infringed”?

Seems like he concentrated more on “The right of the people to keep and bear arms” (a largely undefined series of words).

He seemed to say some things are not included in “The right of the people to keep and bear arms”.

If “something” is not included in “The right of the people to keep and bear arms”, that “something” is not covered by “Shall not be infringed”.

27 posted on 01/30/2014 9:16:09 AM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rktman

High Capacity = more than one...


28 posted on 01/30/2014 9:17:56 AM PST by Kickass Conservative (Nobody owes you a living, so shut up and get back to work...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

If this asshat truly believes his position is correct then he is grossly incompetent and should disbarred immediately for being an idiot or
he is just spouting party propaganda and should be hung for his efforts
to undermine the Constitution which he swore an oath to uphold .


29 posted on 01/30/2014 9:20:24 AM PST by nvscanman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

I’ve been so busy getting my other Bill Of Rights permits that I must have missed this one. Dang!


30 posted on 01/30/2014 9:31:10 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

Well-equipped, well-organized and well-trained.


31 posted on 01/30/2014 9:38:42 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: rktman
From the article: "The founding fathers had no idea how powerful–and destructive–today’s weapons would become, he said."

The implication is clear, then, that we are all entitled to own a fully equipped war ship, all the cannons we want, and gun powder by the ton.

Somehow I would guess the professor's argument would be different when it comes to such things which were prevalent during the Revolution.

32 posted on 01/30/2014 9:39:02 AM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Kilmer disagreed, saying that citizen militias have waged successful defensive campaigns against armies all over the globe.

He reminded the audience that gun control has historically given dictators free rein to abuse their citizens.

“Taking away citizens’ arms has always been the first step of the greatest human rights violations,” he said. “The mistake of giving up your arms is a mistake you only get to make once.”

Winston Churchill "If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." - Winston Churchill

33 posted on 01/30/2014 9:40:54 AM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed & water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon

I haven’t read the other books you mentioned, thanks for the recommendations.


34 posted on 01/30/2014 9:42:07 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rktman
If that is the level of competence that passes for a professor at Stanford...save your money. They have illiterates on the faculty. I noticed the "adjunct professor" label. He's a part timer who enjoys being associated with the Stanford name.
35 posted on 01/30/2014 9:50:44 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Ooo...the illiterate is the FULL professor on the staff of Stanford. Save your money. Don't go there.
36 posted on 01/30/2014 9:52:04 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

Well THAT’S it for me! If a STANFORD LAW PROFESSOR SAYS IT, IT MUST BE TRUE! I’ll turn my gun in and make a donation to my local Democrat club.


37 posted on 01/30/2014 9:52:23 AM PST by jmaroneps37 (Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

I read the Second Amendment to read that we should bear the state of the art military assault weapon of the day.


38 posted on 01/30/2014 10:03:53 AM PST by duffee (NO poll tax, NO tax on firearms, ammunition or gun safes. NO gun free zones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faucetman
IMO, the proper word is “FOOL”.

But “asinine” works, too.

39 posted on 01/30/2014 10:12:43 AM PST by chesley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rktman

donohue@law.stanford.edu


40 posted on 01/30/2014 10:29:02 AM PST by Dalberg-Acton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Donohue explained that the Second Amendment must be interpreted in historical context. The founding fathers had no idea how powerful–and destructive–today’s weapons would become, he said.

This guy is an idiot. Historical context INCLUDED the most powerful and destructive weapons in use at the time.
41 posted on 01/30/2014 10:32:23 AM PST by stylin19a (Obama -> Fredo smart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

He doesn’t understand militia, he doesn’t understand free, he doesn’t understand right, he doesn’t understand people, he doesn’t understand keep, and he doesn’t understand infringed.

Despite that incredible ignorance, he’s still a professor of law.


42 posted on 01/30/2014 10:44:40 AM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nvscanman

To paraphrase the old saying,

1. those lawyers who can’t practice, teach.

2. those who can’t teach, write books.

3. those who can’t write books, become politicians.

4. those who can’t do real politics become President.

I’m not naming anyone in particular. Just sayin’ ...


43 posted on 01/30/2014 10:47:19 AM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

Brilliant summation.


44 posted on 01/30/2014 11:03:58 AM PST by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rktman

This law prof is citing administrative law rationale.

So does Obamacare.

Instead of calling him an idiot, you should try to understand the legal mechanism he is deliberately misapplying.

It’s the root of everything the Rats do, yet conservatives have yet to address it.

Search “One Stone, Two Powers” by me, Talisker, for a primer.


45 posted on 01/30/2014 11:14:54 AM PST by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Talisker

LOL! Okay, now I’m suspicious. Where did Justice Roberts get a copy of the ACA? Must have been after the sign it read it statement huh?


46 posted on 01/30/2014 11:24:02 AM PST by rktman (Under my plan(scheme), the price of EVERYTHING will necessarily skyrocket! Period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
The implication is clear, then, that we are all entitled to own a fully equipped war ship, all the cannons we want, and gun powder by the ton.

Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to carry-out a Letter of Marque and Reprisal, issued under Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution.

47 posted on 01/30/2014 11:57:51 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: rktman
The never envisioned the internet, radio or television either, so I guess our 1st Amendment rights don't apply there, too.

The kind of idiot you can only find at a University.

48 posted on 01/30/2014 12:18:14 PM PST by pierrem15 (Claudius: "Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

Precisely! Many people understand that “regulated” means that the people are subject to regulations by the government.
If that were so, the words “shall not be infringed” are superfluous.

THOSE WORDS MEAN WHAT THEY SAY, NO MORE OR NO LESS!

Not shouting at you but I see the need to emphasize the point for others.


49 posted on 01/30/2014 1:51:44 PM PST by BatGuano (You don't think I'd go into combat with loose change in my pocket, do ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: duffee

Right On!!


50 posted on 01/30/2014 1:53:19 PM PST by BatGuano (You don't think I'd go into combat with loose change in my pocket, do ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 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