Rewrite the Second Amendment?

Magic City Morning Star ^ | Jun 2, 2004 | Richard D. Skidmore

[neverdem]

The Ninth Circus uses magical thinking.

[neverdem]

BANG

[Joe Brower]

[RetiredArmy]

The 9th circus sucks. Simple as that. Leftist who support socialism and homosexualism. Nothing more.

[GrandEagle]

Very clear and well put! Excellent post!

[Carry_Okie]

The Ninth Circus uses magical thinking.

Not at all. They write what they think will work. They don't care a whit how well supported it might be in law or history. After all, liberals are fascists; to them, this is about using power to get what they want by any means necessary.

[CFW]

ping and a bump.

We cant expound on this enough.

[AndyTheBear]

Good article. Bump.

[Dead Corpse]

Is it time to stop playing nice yet?

[Charles Martel]

I wonder if this writer bothered to read the dissenting opinions in the Silviera case. If so, the words of Judge Alex Kozinski would have told the stark truth of the matter.

I believe Kozinzki actually fled the Ceausescu regime in Romania, so perhaps he values his liberties a bit more than does the average citizen. In any event, Judge Kozinski explained that history could have been vastly different had American slaves or European Jews been able to arm themselves and fight back against the governments that oppressed them.

"The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed — where the government refuses to stand for re-election and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees,” he wrote in his dissent. “However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.”

Kozinski also made special note of the interpretive inconsistency of the judges on the Reinhardt panel given their usual proclivity to find individual rights when the Constitution uses the words “people” or “person.” “Had they brought the same generous approach to the Second Amendment that they routinely bring to the First, Fourth and selected portions of the Fifth, they would have had no trouble finding an individual right to bear arms,” he wrote.

You know Judge Reinhardt (the moron who cited Bellesiles' already-discredited book in his ruling, then later deleted that little "oops") must hate Kozinski's guts.

Kozinski's dissent alone serves to show how the 9th Circuit is trying to re-write the meaning of the 2nd Amendment.

[Mr. Mojo]

Did the 9th Circuit judges abrogate the history of our nation, ignore the grievances that compelled us to separate from England, discard the debates of the Federalists and Anti-federalists, legislate from the bench which is not their responsibility, and thus compel another re-writing of our natural history to justify their decree, relying on the general ignorance of the people to allow their decisions to stand?

Well, yeah.

[RKV]

Add the words - "this time we really mean it."

[brbethke]

...one could reasonably ask: Did the 9th Circuit judges abrogate the history of our nation, ignore the grievances that compelled us to separate from England, discard the debates of the Federalists and Anti-federalists, legislate from the bench which is not their responsibility, and thus compel another re-writing of our natural history to justify their decree, relying on the general ignorance of the people to allow their decisions to stand?

Yes, as the 9th often has and will no doubt do again. Next question.

[bondjamesbond]

Richard Skidmore mis-quotes the Second Amendment...

His version: A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The actual version: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

The difference, of course, is in the punctuation.

The version Skidmore author uses is much more definitive. Unfortunately, we have to live with the one we have. It makes no sense to use as a basis for argument language that does not exist in the actual Constitution.

By hyphenating well-regulated, Skidmore emphasizes the meaning of regulated that refers to drilling and practice. By eliminating the first comma, Skidmore makes it clear that the militia is what is necessary for state security. And, finally, by eliminating the last comma, the statement that the right of the people shall not be infringed is much more direct and unequivocal.

Unfortunately, this exercise in creative writing exists nowhere in the law, so it is moot.

[SpyGuy]

The author hit the nail on the head when he asks: "Do the 9th Circuit judges [rely] on the general ignorance of the people to allow their decisions to stand?"

The answer, of course, is a resounding "Yes!" And this is why the Left has targeted our institutions of education indoctrination: if you can control how the majority of people think (or fail to think), then you can control the nation.

America must dis-band the country's largest and most powerful union: the National Education Association (which is affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America). And I urge all parents to pull their children out of the public "school" system.

[NRA2BFree]

Great article!

[TheLurkerX]

Methinks the 9th Circuit isn't grounded properly. Somebody needs to make sure their wiring is up to code.

[Carry_Okie]

We already home school.

[Dead Corpse]

My daughter is 9 months old. We are already planning on homeschooling.

I've even got her first .22 picked out. ;-)

[robertpaulsen]

Another amendment that was submitted and rejected was one that stated the BOR would also apply to the states.

In the above article, the Ninth Circuit was ruling on a California state law, which is not affected by the second amendment (which only applies to the federal government).