Interpreting the Second Amendment (BARF Alert)

Washington Times ^ | 1/12/03 | Alex Gerber

[kattracks]

The worldwide terrorist activity directed from abroad against the United States has given birth to a Homeland Security Department to help fulfill one of the primary responsibilities of government

[capitan_refugio]

Believe it or not, one of the best legal arguments made for the individual right to bear arms is found in the "Dred Scott decision." Even thought the case was about the purported rights of slaves transported into free territory, the rationale in the decision discusses other types of Constitutional ownership. The Dred Scott decision is found many places on the web. Read it.

Another line of reasoning which makes the most sense to me is this: If the Framers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights wanted the 2nd Amendment to specifically refer to a State's right, rather than an individual right, the wording of the Amendment would have been, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the MILITIA to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

But that's not what it says. It says, "the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms ..." Nowhere else in the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, does the phrase, "the People," refer to the State. Look at Amendment 4. Interpreting "the People" to mean "the State" is ludicrous. Same with the 1st Amendment. Same with the Preamble.

[Looking4Truth]

"Another line of reasoning which makes the most sense to me is this: If the Framers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights wanted the 2nd Amendment to specifically refer to a State's right, rather than an individual right, the wording of the Amendment would have been, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the MILITIA to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

"But that's not what it says. It says, "the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms ..." Nowhere else in the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, does the phrase, "the People," refer to the State. Look at Amendment 4. Interpreting "the People" to mean "the State" is ludicrous. Same with the 1st Amendment. Same with the Preamble."

Good point. I'll have to remember that one. You've also got me curious about the Dred Scott decision now. Haven't seen that one since about junior high so the memory is not clear. (Damn internet keeping me up all night. Ahhhh, I love it!)

[wardaddy]

Big Media lies!

Yes and it's used as an excuse to encroach on the rest of us. Punish law abiding folks because of concentrated gun violence that they nevertheless fail to properly address. It is indeed Orwellian.

[The_Macallan]

But if we honor the charge in the Preamble of our Constitution to "ensure domestic tranquility," it is surely not beyond the purview of this new agency to direct some of its attention to the domestic terror resulting from the guns overflowing our streets. Imagine the enormous uproar if the 30 murders daily from domestic gunfire resulted from al Qaeda terrorism.

Imagine the enormous uproar if the 160 daily motor vehicle deaths, or as many as 268 daily hospital error deaths resulted from al Qaeda terrorism too!

Ban motor vehicles! Ban hospitals! And ban knives, swimming pools, bathtubs and ladders too!

And why doesn't this liberal, lying, dim-wit, gun-grabbing hack mention the nearly 5,500 times a DAY that firearms are used by law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from criminals??? http://www.guncite.com/kleckandgertztable1.html



Guns are now so easily accessible in our country that the restrictions imposed by the 1968 Gun Control Act are obviously enforced only in the breach.

"enforced only in the breach"!? WTF?
I think this guy secretly wants to be "enforced in the breach"!



The more stringent gun control measures currently under discussion, licensing of firearms and a federal database to identify bullets and shell casings involved in crime, are not likely to go far. They simply do not meet the approval of the National Rifle Association.

Nor do they meet ANY logical approval.
Regarding "Ballistic Fingerprinting" - http://www.nssf.org/PDF/CA_study.pdf
"Firearms that generate markings on cartridge casings can change with use and can also be readily altered by the user. They are not permanently defined identifiers like fingerprints or DNA. Hence, images captured when the firearm is produced may not have a fixed relationship to fired cartridge casings subsequently recovered."

"Cartridge casings from different manufacturers of ammunition may be marked differently by a single firearm such that they may not correlate favorably."

~ California Department of Justice, October 5, 2001.



Repeated polls indicating public support for more restrictive gun laws have been easily swept aside by this tightly controlled organization that is at the height of its power and has the clout to dominate gun politics.

And WHY is this organization at the "height of it's power"???
Because gun-grabbing nutjobs like Al Gore & Co. LOST in 2000 and LOST again in 2002 riding on the message of "more gun control laws" that the MAJORITY of Americans don't support.
MOST Americans don't want "gun" control, they want "vicious, savage, inhuman, troglyditic, coked-up, gangster-punk-thug-wastoid" control!!!



More importantly, they would have no effect on the basic cause of our outrageous homicide rate ? the misreading of the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

The basic cause of homicide is a "misreading of the Second Amendment"??? HO- LY- CRAP!!!
So now it's not the vicious, savage, inhuman, troglyditic, coked-up, gangster-punk-thug-wastoid who just got out of juvenile detention FOR THE 17TH FRICKING TIME's fault!! It's a problem with legal semantics!?
Unbefrickinlievable!!!



Clearly, the NRA does not interpret this amendment as the Framers of the Constitution intended. Rarely quoted is the clarifying preamble to the one sentence Second Amendment: "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" (italics added). "Security" is the key word and refers to a problem completely irrelevant to our nation today. . . . But the political landscape in Europe has changed over the past two centuries, and the well-warranted fears of our Founding Fathers are clearly not germane today.

BZZZZT!!!

WRONG!!

1911: Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

1929: Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 40-60 million citizens, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated or starved to death.

1935: China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

1938: Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, Catholics and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

1956: Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated."

1964: Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

1966-1976: China still has gun control. Another 50-100 million civilians were killed in Mao Tse Tung's "Cultural Revolution".

1970: Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

1990s: Rwanda established gun control. In a span of 100 days in April 1994, 800,000 people who were unable to defend themselves were massacred to death - most by machetes. How many dead, hacked-up bodies do you think were found holding a loaded gun? (answer is less than 1)

1992: Los Angeles California, USA. For three days police stood by and watched, unable to stop the rioting, arson and destruction of whole neighborhoods. Yet many Korean stores were virtually untouched - protected by their well-armed storeowners who exercised their right to self-defense through their right to keep and bear arms and who did for themselves what the police were unwilling or unable to do.

Late 1990s: Great Britain established total gun control. Robberies, burglaries and assaults have skyrocketted making London's violent crime rate now higher than anywhere in America.

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it



The NRA has muddied the gun-control waters by insisting that the "militia" in the Second Amendment is not a collective noun, and also can be applied to an individual. But Madison's rhetoric on this point is the essence of clarity as has been repeatedly reaffirmed by our Founding Fathers, our courts and our lexicon. A few examples will suffice:
? In the Virginia 1776 Bill of Rights is found: "A well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people .
? In 1990, the Supreme Court ruled that the National Guard was the only rightful owner of the militia label.
? The dictionary defines militia as: (a) an army of citizens who are not regular soldiers but who undergo training for emergency duty or national defenses. (b) Every state of the United States has a militia called the National Guard.

Bull-Snot!!

First of all, why doesn't this moron look up the United States Code - THAT'S the only LEGALLY relevant meaning of "militia" -

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/311.html
Clearly, all able-bodied males between 17-45 (17-64 for ex-military) are, under US Law, part of the "militia".
But this is all irrelevant anyway. The 2nd Amendment protects the right of "the people" to keep and bear arms, not "the state" and not "the militia".



In December 2002, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that individuals had no right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.

BFD! In October 2001, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals stated that individuals DO have the right to keep and bear arms and that the 2nd Amendment DID apply to INDIVIDUALS. And that is STILL the law of the land in the 5th Circuit states even after the Supreme Court's examination of the Emerson case. The Supreme Court did NOT contradict nor erase the 5th Circuit's ruling that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is indeed an INDIVIDUAL right.

And in 1990, the Supreme Court stated that the term "people" in the 2nd Amendment referred to the same group as in the Preamble, the 1st, 4th, 9th & 10th Amendments. "While this textual exegesis is by no means conclusive, it suggests that "the people" protected by the Fourth Amendment, and the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community." ~ Supreme Court, U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 1990.

If the RKBA were meant to apply only to the militia, then the 2nd Amendment would have read, "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

For 200+ years the 2nd Amendment has ALWAYS been viewed as applying to individuals. Only in the last few decades has the dumbing down of society been so successful that the absurd "up-is-down, black-is-white" notions of the leftwing radical anti-gun whackos been able to take root.



Despite these legal decisions by the highest courts of the land and our English grammar, Attorney General John Ashcroft, undoubtedly with the blessing of President Bush, has assured the NRA that the Second Amendment gives an individual the right to bear arms. We evidently have an administration that not only sets itself above the law, but has little use for a dictionary.

I can just picture it now, this pencil-neck bonehead standing before the US Supreme Court waving a dog-eared copy of Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Abridged Form (in paperback) that he got as a high-school graduation gift from his mommy saying in a nasally twang "But-but-but your honor sir, according to the dictionary, the definition of the word "people" does not say anything about "Americans", so clearly then, according to MY pocket dictionary, the 2nd Amendment, along with the 1st, 9th, and 10th Amendments do not apply to "Americans". Yep. It's all right there in the dictionary sir."



Badly needed in the U.S. are strict gun-control laws aimed at removing guns from the streets and reducing a firearm homicide rate from 10 to a 100 times higher than that of other civilized nations. In developing such laws, perhaps we should consider, with reservations reflecting our culture and traditions, the firearm penalties meted out in countries whose populations are among the safest in the world ? e.g., Singapore. There is a certain appeal about living in an atmosphere where one can walk down the darkest alley at midnight without a second thought.

If this pathetic, frightened, sissified, emasculated, little wet mouse likes looking around the world for answers to America's problems - well fine, then maybe he should just take a lesson from England and Switzerland.
* England banned guns and now London has a higher crime rate than New York City or Washington D.C. (or even DETROIT!)
* Switzerland REQUIRES ALL households to have military guns and ammunition and they don't have hardly ANY firearm-related crimes.

* * * Criminals fear an armed population * * *

It's not the guns STUPID, it's the CRIMINALS!!!

[John R. (Bob) Locke]

I hope you're wrong, but I fear you're right.

The biggest problem is that far too many people just don't care as long as the lights stay on and their paychecks keep getting deposited.

[Living Stone]

The heat seems to be increasing lately on our dear boiling frog.

Our beloved frog must jump soon, or perish.

Please join me in praying to our Heavenly Father, that this nation may be restored to rightousness without weathering the impending storm.

Lord God Almighty, we beseech You, that You restore truth and justice within the hearts of the people, who are the rulers of this nation. We ask that You allow them to see the folly and evil of thier ways, and to repent and humble themselves before You, and turn from thier sins, toward Your mercy. We humbly pray that all this may come to pass, that we may not be forced to do our final duty as patriots.
Bless those who love You and Liberty with the courage and strength and wisdom to prevail over our wicked foe and oppressor, that tool of Satan known as Democrats.
Your will be done in all things. Amen.

"Let not your hearts be troubled", fellow Freepers.

That same God who raised up friends to fight the battles of our forefathers is still upon His throne. He has NEVER forsaken the cry of His children.

All that having been said, let us be diligent in preparing ourselves.

We may have to jump soon.

[Adder]

"Regarding the Second Amendment, the Federalist Papers focused on the tyrannical kingdoms overseas that
would be "speedily overturned" were the people allowed to bear arms. The civilian militia proposed in the Second
Amendment was considered an "advantage" the new nation "would possess over the people of almost every other
nation" and would serve as a "barrier" to "the despotism which was the scourge of the Old World."
But the political landscape in Europe has changed over the past two centuries, and the well-warranted fears of
our Founding Fathers are clearly not germane today."
___________________________________________________________

Ya know, it strikes me that there are a lot of things in our laws that are "not germane" today. So in that sense, it doesn't matter what the rationale in 1789 was. Quartering troops in your home is not very germane, either. But we do not deny that the prohibition against it is a part of the Constitution, nor do we seek to explain it away like these anti-gun zealots attempt to do.

[itzmygun]

Even Charlton Heston, whose rifle would have to be "torn from his cold, dead hands," would agree that the need for a civilian armed militia to prevent the takeover of our government has no validity in the 21st century. To reason otherwise is ludicrous, else the gunslingers of America should augment their arsenal with tanks, anti-aircraft guns and mortars.

Apparently this guy reads no news other than his own ego-inspired chaff. Right now, there are several places where people armed mainly with rifles are holding their own against superior forces. Chechneya (forgive spelling) is one that comes to mind.

I remember seeing an article about cheap, almost useless guns being dropped into France during WW II. They were not powerful weapons, but they could be used to take better weapons from the enemy. It just goes up the ladder from there - you use those guns to raid an arsenal and acquire better weapons, etc., etc..

[.30Carbine]

Your most excellent and rightly outraged response to this article bears repeating.
I am bookmarking for the facts of your post alone.

1911: Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

1929: Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 40-60 million citizens, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated or starved to death.

1935: China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

1938: Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, Catholics and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

1956: Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated."

1964: Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

1966-1976: China still has gun control. Another 50-100 million civilians were killed in Mao Tse Tung's "Cultural Revolution".

1970: Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

1990s: Rwanda established gun control. In a span of 100 days in April 1994, 800,000 people who were unable to defend themselves were massacred to death - most by machetes. How many dead, hacked-up bodies do you think were found holding a loaded gun? (answer is less than 1)

1992: Los Angeles California, USA. For three days police stood by and watched, unable to stop the rioting, arson and destruction of whole neighborhoods. Yet many Korean stores were virtually untouched - protected by their well-armed storeowners who exercised their right to self-defense through their right to keep and bear arms and who did for themselves what the police were unwilling or unable to do.

Late 1990s: Great Britain established total gun control. Robberies, burglaries and assaults have skyrocketted making London's violent crime rate now higher than anywhere in America.

CombatEngineer, I read these words posted by you on another thread - I own guns, but do believe in strict gun control. - and wanted to share some truth with you. I hope you will reconsider your stand on gun control upon reflection. After all, if RKBA is not a God-given right, and not clearly defined and defended in our 2nd Amendment, into whose hands will you willingly place the power of determining who has the right to keep and bear arms and who does not? I do not wish to jump to conclusions about you: perhaps what you meant by "strict gun control" would have been more aptly worded 'strict law enforcement'?

[.30Carbine]

After all, as The_Macallan put it:

It's not the guns STUPID,
it's the CRIMINALS!!!

[.30Carbine]

I am looking forward to reading your books, gentlemen.

I am currently reading Unintended Consequences, by John Ross, which my loving husband gave me for Christmas.

[Lion Den Dan]

, only government educators could keep all types of "dangerous" books.

They already try to do just that. Drawing some physics and chemistry texts from the local library can draw some dramatic attention for yourself.

[chuknospam]

Bump

[Godel]

The publicity swirling around the snipers and their upcoming trials will eventually simmer down, but not the strident voice of the NRA with its familiar battle cry about "our constitutional right to bear arms." Repeated polls indicating public support for more restrictive gun laws have been easily swept aside by this tightly controlled organization that is at the height of its power and has the clout to dominate gun politics.

This is obscene, not only is protecting our constitutionally guaranteed rights "strident", but those Constitutionally guaranteed rights should be swept aside by a poll.

[harpseal]

Clearly the author of this piece cares nothing for reducing the crime rate, greater security, or the clear meaning of the Second. His only care is instituting the agenda of the gun confiscation lobby. It is a necessary prerequisite to a totalitarian state and that totalitarian state is all that really matters to these pices of offal.

[tomswiftjr]

This guy is a fossil, he graduated from the U of Illinois over 60 years ago. I doubt he has any particular expertise in parsing the English language or interpreting constitutional mandates. Here's his data if you would like to communicate directly with him:

Association of State Medical Board Executive Directors

Medical Board of California Search Results


Licensee Name ALEX GERBER
Primary License Status Code RENEWED/CURRENT | RETIRED
Secondary License Status Code PERM CE WAIVER
License Number AFE9465
License Type AFE
Address 13374 CAM. MAR VILLA
City State Zip DEL MAR CA 92014
Country USA
Original License Date 04/30/1942
License Expiration Date 10/31/2003
Medical School UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS COLLEGE OF MEDICINE
Year Graduated 1941

Note: data current as of: 12/31/2002

[harpseal]

Welcome home

[GregoryFul]

From "Time Almanac 2002",

Murder Victims: by Race and Sex, 1999

White: 6,310 Black: 5,855

Murder Victims: Types of Weapon Used, 1999

Firearms: 8,259 (65.2%) Knives: 1,667 (13.2%) Blunt objects: 736 (5.8%) Personal weapons: 855 (6.8%)

Looks like we ought to take guns (and knives) away from blacks! They are 12.3% of the population (white: 75.1%), and so 6 times as likely to commit murder. Disarm blacks, cut the murder rate in half!

What say the liberal mongrels?

[Skwidd]

Believe it or not, one of the best legal arguments made for the individual right to bear arms is found in the "Dred Scott decision."

Thanks, I'll have a look!

[KC_for_Freedom]

Badly needed in the U.S. are strict gun-control laws aimed at removing guns from the streets and reducing a firearm homicide rate from 10 to a 100 times higher than that of other civilized nations. In developing such laws, perhaps we should consider, with reservations reflecting our culture and traditions, the firearm penalties meted out in countries whose populations are among the safest in the world — e.g., Singapore. There is a certain appeal about living in an atmosphere where one can walk down the darkest alley at midnight without a second thought

Solution is simple nitwit, move to singapore. Adios.