Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Right to Bear Arms? What History Tells Us.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Half Pint View Post
    Considering that he is a Constitutional Law Professor I wouldn't be that sure of any attack on the 2nd. , except the phrase 'well regulated' what ever that means.
    I wouldn't be too sure of that. Just because he was a Constitutional Law Professor means nothing. He's from notoriously antigun Illinois. The SCOTUS voted 5-4 in the Heller vs DC case and the four no's were mostly appointed by Democratic presidents. So you see, there are scholars on both sides of the aisle.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by [email protected] View Post
      I wouldn't be too sure of that. Just because he was a Constitutional Law Professor means nothing. He's from notoriously antigun Illinois. The SCOTUS voted 5-4 in the Heller vs DC case and the four no's were mostly appointed by Democratic presidents. So you see, there are scholars on both sides of the aisle.
      Where is the buckle to my seat belt when I really really really need it...
      Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
      (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

      Comment


      • Originally posted by [email protected] View Post
        I wouldn't be too sure of that. Just because he was a Constitutional Law Professor means nothing. He's from notoriously antigun Illinois. The SCOTUS voted 5-4 in the Heller vs DC case and the four no's were mostly appointed by Democratic presidents. So you see, there are scholars on both sides of the aisle.
        First, Obama was not a "Constitutional Law Professor". He was a a Constitutional Law Instructor. A fine distinction, perhaps, however I found his many and varied observations on DC v Heller to be quite inaccurate. He would not qualify in academic circles as a "scholar" on Constitutional issues.

        Second, the vast majority of actual Constitutional scholars agree in the individual right unconnected or conditioned upon service in the "well regulated militia". The high water point of the antigun position was a 1990 article in Parade Magazine by former Chief Justice Warren Burger, but the trend was beginning to shift with the publication of The Embarrassing Second Amendment by Sanford Levinson, a well respected and quite liberal Professor of Constitutional Law. What followed was quite remarkable and concluded with the defection of the most preeminent liberal constitutonal scholar alive today, Laurence Tribe... Constitutional Law Professor at Harvard and author of the leading textbook on constitutional law used in law schools today.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Miss You View Post
          What was Saint George Tucker's interpretation of the Second Amendment?


          With respect to the Second Amendment, Tucker wrote the following:

          Congress has, moreover, power to provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states, respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia, according to the discipline prescribed by congress C. U. S. Art. 1, Sec. 8.

          The objects of this clause of the constitution, although founded upon the principle of our state bill of rights, Art. 8, declaring, "that a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state," were thought to be dangerous to the state governments. The convention of Virginia, therefore, proposed the following amendment to the constitution; "that each state respectively should have the power to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining it's own militia, whenever congress should neglect to provide for the same." A further amendment proposed, was, "that the militia should not be subject to martial law, except when in actual service, in time of war, rebellion, or invasion" .... A provision manifestly implied in the words of the constitution. As to the former of these amendments, all room for doubt, or uneasiness upon the subject, seems to be completely removed, by the fourth article of amendments to the constitution, since ratified, viz. "That a militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep, and hear arms, shall not be infringed." To which we may add, that the power of arming the militia, not being prohibited to the states, respectively, by the constitution, is, consequently, reserved to them, concurrently with the federal government. In pursuance of these powers, an act passed, 2 Cong. 1 Sess. c. 33, to provide for the national defence, by establishing an uniform militia throughout the United States; and the system of organization thereby established, has been carried into effect in Virginia, and probably in all the other states of the union.

          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. Amendments to C. U. S. Art. 4.

          This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty .... The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.

          Let's look at Tucker's statement that,
          The objects of this clause of the constitution, although founded upon the principle of our state bill of rights, Art. 8, declaring, "that a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state," were thought to be dangerous to the state governments.

          Who was Tucker talking about? Who thought Art. 1, Sec. 8, Clause 16 of the Constitution was dangerous to the state governments? Why did they think the clause was dangerous?
          Upon closer scrutiny, it appears that Saint George Tucker never actually interpreted the Second Amendment. That is to say, he never expressed an opinion on what any of the language meant.

          He made statements implying that the word "people" in the Amendment really meant "each state respectively" and the object was to grant the states authority to provide for their own militias, if Congress neglected to do so. Then later, he made statements implying that the object was to protect a person's ability to "keep a gun in his house."
          Last edited by Miss You; 12 Nov 08, 16:08.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Miss You View Post
            Upon closer scrutiny, it appears that Saint George Tucker never actually interpreted the Second Amendment. He never expressed an opinion on what any of the language meant.
            You can actually say that with a straight face? Absolutely incredible.

            Originally posted by Miss You View Post
            Then later, he made statements implying that it was all about a person being able to "keep a gun in his house."
            There is no implication whatsoever. Tucker's clear interpretation of the 2nd is that it is a provision which protects the true palladium of liberty .... The right of self defence is the first law of nature

            <courser comments deleted to preseve the rules of decorum in this forum>

            Comment


            • Well now we're pd q getting started. Laws of nature and even I know that Palladium is one step down from a Nickel on the Periodic Table.

              Buckle up, boys and girls, could be a rough ride here.
              Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
              (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

              Comment


              • Originally posted by General Staff View Post
                Well now we're pd q getting started. Laws of nature and even I know that Palladium is one step down from a Nickel on the Periodic Table.

                Buckle up, boys and girls, could be a rough ride here.
                My wife would say a Periodic table is one for the dinning room from the Elizabethan age

                That ELEMENT doesn't figure into my thinking though LOL
                I like Dogs far better than most People

                As our Supply Sargent once said "If'n you only got one - order one - If'n you got Two - turn one in !! (???)

                BoRG

                Comment


                • Originally posted by General Staff View Post
                  Well now we're pd q getting started. Laws of nature and even I know that Palladium is one step down from a Nickel on the Periodic Table.

                  Buckle up, boys and girls, could be a rough ride here.
                  Have Gun Will Travel is the card of the man named Palladium...

                  Comment


                  • Who was the actor that played Paladin ?? I can't remember his name now.
                    I like Dogs far better than most People

                    As our Supply Sargent once said "If'n you only got one - order one - If'n you got Two - turn one in !! (???)

                    BoRG

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Kaiser Franz View Post
                      Who was the actor that played Paladin ?? I can't remember his name now.
                      Richard Boone.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by legaleagle_45 View Post
                        Will Travel
                        Yes I think I met him once too on the road...
                        Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
                        (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

                        Comment


                        • Cool -- He really looked the part
                          I like Dogs far better than most People

                          As our Supply Sargent once said "If'n you only got one - order one - If'n you got Two - turn one in !! (???)

                          BoRG

                          Comment


                          • Based on his comments regarding the Second Amendment, it appears that Tucker may have favored a right to keep and bear arms for individual or personal self defense. However, he never actually said that the Second Amendment protected such a right. He only implied it.

                            In his comments on Article One Section Eight, Tucker implies that he interpreted the Second Amendment to mean "that each state respectively should have the power to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining it's own militia, whenever congress should neglect to provide for the same."

                            I don't see how to reconcile the two "implied" interpretations. One implies that "people" means "each person in the United States". But, the other implies that "people" means "each state respectively."

                            It soundeth lyke he wolde bothe eate his cake, and have his cake.
                            Last edited by Miss You; 12 Nov 08, 18:11.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Kaiser Franz View Post
                              Cool -- He really looked the part
                              You seen him too? Looked like a cross between Rip van Winkle and Mark Twain to me.
                              Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
                              (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

                              Comment


                              • Only on TV -- I never missed an episode
                                I like Dogs far better than most People

                                As our Supply Sargent once said "If'n you only got one - order one - If'n you got Two - turn one in !! (???)

                                BoRG

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X