Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)The Second Amendment Has Nothing to Do with Gun Ownership [View all]
The Gun Lobby's interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American People by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies - the militia - would be maintained for the defense of the state. The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires.
Retired Chief Justice Warren Burger, "The Right to Bear Arms," Parade Magazine, January 14, 1990.
In 2008, this fraud was furthered by Mr. Scalia, joined by his fellow ideologues Thomas, Alito, Roberts and Kennedy. Yet five zealots in black robes cannot change the historical record. Writing something down on paper or pushing the send button to the internet doesn't make it so. Scalia and gang, in ganging together to pen District of Columbia v. Heller, cannot change history, anymore than a Truther diary about how the 9-11 hijackers were Republican ideologues giving their lives for Bush and Cheney, makes such idiocy so.
In its 2002 decision Silveira v. Lockyer, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals provided a very detailed, extensive, and well researched examination of the historical record surrounding the adoption of the Second Amendment. Although Silveira v. Lockyer would overturned by Messrs. Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito and Kennedy in 2008, the 9th Circuit's outstanding research surpasses both Scalia's NRA talking points that passes for a Supreme Court decision, as well as Justice Stevens' far more persuasive dissent. This diary provides a summary of the Ninth Circuit's research that led to that court's conclusion that the Second Amendment was intended to protect the right of the states to form militias, and was not intended to allow anyone and everyone without restriction to buy whatever guns may be on the market. I hope, in a future diary, to analyze Scalia's Heller opinion and illustrate why Scalia is wrong and a hypocrite to claim that he is governed by original intent.
The Second Amendment states:
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.
"he original intent of the Second Amendment was to protect the right of the states to form and maintain state militias"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/25/1171716/-The-Second-Amendment-Has-Nothing-to-Do-with-Gun-Ownership#
State Militias = National Guard!
Well regulated could be restrictions on certain types of weapons.
72 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Well, that's about the lamest, most cherry picked interpretation of the 2nd amendment I've seen
MadHound
Dec 2012
#1
well, that "some retired judge" was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United
CTyankee
Dec 2012
#12
Do you have any research to the contrary? Please let me know instead of relying on
CTyankee
Dec 2012
#24
And the same judge who thought that anti-sodomy laws were constitutional, the death penalty was a-ok
X_Digger
Dec 2012
#23
we are not talking about his opinion about anti-sodomy laws and the death penalty, now
CTyankee
Dec 2012
#25
It doesn't take an expert to see that he despised individual rights, generally.
X_Digger
Dec 2012
#63
He's only representing that those words were those of a judge published in Parade Magazine.
AnotherMcIntosh
Dec 2012
#16
I'm not. So I won't address Burger's legal claims; other more qualified people already have.
Lizzie Poppet
Dec 2012
#29
Apparently someone at Dailykos made this up, and then at least two OPs have been created
AnotherMcIntosh
Dec 2012
#35
He's not relying upon the actual language published in Parade Magazine and attributed to Burger.
AnotherMcIntosh
Dec 2012
#11
MadHound I must angrily disagree with your subject. I don't believe OP is that good. nt
jody
Dec 2012
#27
Since the origional source is Parade Magazine from Jan 14, 1990, that is the best source
AnotherMcIntosh
Dec 2012
#7
Until 2008 the OP has it correct. Morton Grove, IL, for example was able to ban handguns. The
byeya
Dec 2012
#8
liberal N proud, don't let this folks get you down. Thanks for the informative contribution.
ywcachieve
Dec 2012
#9
If facts matter, his informative contribution was to republish something that was untrue
AnotherMcIntosh
Dec 2012
#17
I agree with OP. Doesn't matter though, even Scalia agrees restrictions are OK. Let's pass them.
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#10
Only if I get to be the reincarnation of Emperor Norton I of the United States
derby378
Dec 2012
#54
A good, lengthy, scholarly book review regarding this topic, "To Keep and Bear Arms" by Garry Wills
yodermon
Dec 2012
#20
Reservist in the Swiss Army are permitted to store military weaponry in their homes.
Aristus
Dec 2012
#28
Congress has all the authority it needs for the militia in Article I, Section 8, clauses 15 & 16.
jody
Dec 2012
#30
bongbong the best review of both sides of RKBA debate is Heller opinion and dissents and the many
jody
Dec 2012
#36
No one has to impugn your intelligence but you do have an opportunity to read the material I
jody
Dec 2012
#42
"yo mama" trash talk doesn't bother me. You use the same old insults so readers will start ignoring
jody
Dec 2012
#48
aikoaiko I'm disappointed that almost none of the anti-RKBA group have read the Heller opinion and
jody
Dec 2012
#49
Burger did not issue the opinion which is now falsely being attributed to him.
AnotherMcIntosh
Dec 2012
#55