Posted on 12/12/2010 11:33:59 AM PST by driftdiver
If you look at the values and the historical record, you will see that the Founding Fathers never intended guns to go unregulated, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer contended Sunday.
Appearing on "Fox News Sunday," Breyer said history stands with the dissenters in the court's decision to overturn a Washington, D.C., handgun ban in the 2008 case "D.C. v. Heller."
Breyer wrote the dissent and was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. 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 may not be ratified than he was about granting individuals the right to bear arms.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Ping
Oops, meant to type:
BTTT
I’d imagine Beyer has read the history. He just has an agenda to revise it to something he wants.
The idea of the “little people “ actually having firearms probably scares him.
Thank you, for posting this thread.
1. I’m no Palin-hater, but she would most likely get slaughtered in a general election.
2. No Court-packing attempt would succeed.
3. No Court-packing attempt should even have to be made. For one thing, had Reagan and Bush the Elder not screwed up so royally with Kennedy (yeah he’s good on this issue...so far, but he’s unreliable overall) and Souter, we’d have 6 solid conservatives on the Court right now. But even more than that, the Sup Court should not have as much power as it has given itself. The Court was never intended to be a supreme policy maker, and it’s questionable how many of the Founders intended the Sup Court to be the final arbiter on Constitutional matters. Jefferson didn’t. And remember when anti-Federalist Brutus warned about what the Sup Court could become, Federalist Hamilton did not refute him by saying that ‘yes, Brutus is right about how much power the Constitution gives the Sup Court and that is what we intend’, but rather said the concerns and warnings were unfounded. Had the early Sup Court made the type of outrageous decisions they’ve routinely made for the last 60 years, then I seriously doubt that the early Presidents, Congresses, and State governments would have just meekly accepted them (or accepted the idea that they must obey them).
So that is the big problem; a federal judiciary with way too much power. Unfortunately we’ve been conditioned to accept judicial supremacy and the idea that the only way to undo a Sup Court decision is with an Amendment or later decision.
Breyer is a loathsome justice. He scorns legitimate rights while trying to invent new ones without a shred of Constitutional merit. In addition to his disregard for property and Second Amendment rights, he also apparently thinks that First Amendment speech rights should contain a loophole when it comes to insulting the Religion of Peace, as shown by his comments on the whole Koran-burning saga from a few months ago.
“Founding Fathers Would Have Allowed Restrictions on Guns
...” But They DIDN’T, Steve.
The quote as you posted it has been edited to remove the anachronisms, but as you can see there were some howlers in the original.
He literally doesn’t know the history of the Constitution.
The dissenter’s opinion in Heller was laughable and was called to account in the majority opinion.
No, not "soon". Do you want The Won to get another appointment who'll screw us for decades after the error resulting in his election has long been corrected?
No, I believe that was Souter. (Unless BOTH towns tried it)
When an ignoramus like Bill Clinton gets elected to the Presidency.
True. I was hoping for one more pick for W (Kennedy or one of the libs). It was the one thing he actually seemed to do well.
Huh?? Thomas is my favorite justice, even better than Scalia. If he's such a moron why are there some cases where he is the ONLY correct vote?
You’re right,I hadn’t thought about that.
Uh, no.
The only "flexibility" in the constitution is the provision of a defined amendment process which must be followed when and if it is believed necessary to account for "changing circumstances".
But thanks for playing.
(now get out).
dont forget Sam Alito...excellent.
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.