
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Second Amendment's time is past
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
One possibility is for the states to be able repel excessive control by the federal government — part of the states vs. federal power theme that was a hot topic at the time.
While that theme continues today, most of us nowadays don't see it as manifesting in armed conflict. Another possible motivation, not explicitly stated but worded "in code," is to enable "the people" (of a certain class) to suppress a slave revolt. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(10/10/2015)
|
Got a bit of bad news for you, David.
"The right there specified is that of 'bearing arms for a lawful purpose.' This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence." - U S v. CRUIKSHANK, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) 92 U.S. 542
The Second Amendment doesn't grant the right, therefore repealing it would not remove the right.
Can you get your mind around that? |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|