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

former9thward

(33,424 posts)
66. Pure nonsense.
Sun Aug 11, 2013, 06:48 PM
Aug 2013

James Madison wrote the 2nd amendment. He gave his views on the subject in the Federalist Papers. But what would he know?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I'd be uncomfortable saying there's one single reason for any part of the Constitution and BoR Recursion Aug 2013 #1
I'm not buying it. NYC_SKP Aug 2013 #2
Here is the original, thoroughly researched article from the UC Davis law review article. pnwmom Aug 2013 #3
I never meant to imply that the Bogus article didn't exist. NYC_SKP Aug 2013 #4
Yeah, Thom regularly makes silly statements about the constitution / law.. X_Digger Aug 2013 #5
Well, I was taught in school that judicial review was codified by Marbury vs. Madison... antigone382 Aug 2013 #55
First use in a SCOTUS case, yes. Thom believes it was created from whole cloth then. X_Digger Aug 2013 #58
Before you decide to be embarrassed for Mr. Hartmann, maybe you should read pnwmom Aug 2013 #10
Okay, granted. Another reason for the 2nd was so as not to abridge the Right to shoot Indians. leveymg Aug 2013 #7
Right. It's not an either-or issue. nt pnwmom Aug 2013 #11
Hey, our side gave away lots of little benefits from the Affordable Care Act in order to win votes calimary Aug 2013 #59
Fascinating. Just Saying Aug 2013 #6
Be on the lookout for confirmation bias. Igel Aug 2013 #8
Why does it even matter why the amendment was ratified other than historical curiosity? branford Aug 2013 #9
Why does it matter? It matters if you think it was enacted to fight tyranny -- pnwmom Aug 2013 #12
Haven't we been fighting that somewhat mythical external enemy to preserve the power of the planter leveymg Aug 2013 #15
The slave insurrection theory of the Second Amendment is an extreme fringe view. branford Aug 2013 #16
I don't totally oppose the right to keep and bear arms. pnwmom Aug 2013 #22
It's not an either / or proposition. branford Aug 2013 #26
No one questions that guns and gun ownership can't be regulated. hack89 Aug 2013 #29
I don't think I have to tell you... NYC_SKP Aug 2013 #14
I don't want to do away with the 2nd Amendment. pnwmom Aug 2013 #24
Again, who is saying that gun Jenoch Aug 2013 #77
That's basically the NRA's position. n/t pnwmom Aug 2013 #78
You HAVE to provide a link. Jenoch Aug 2013 #79
The ad hominem attacks are a 'tell': you are "embarassed" and X Digger calls Hartman "silly" live love laugh Aug 2013 #96
Poverty and hopelessness are the root of Detroit's problems. NYC_SKP Aug 2013 #98
LOL. Member since: Wed Jul 24, 2013. Favorite group: Gun Control & RKBA. DanTex Aug 2013 #30
Except virtually every one of my posts is in General Discussion on a variety of topics. branford Aug 2013 #34
As you can see, the subject of guns tends to attract self-appointed political officers. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #49
If you've actually been reading for a while, then you are surely aware of the huge number of gun DanTex Aug 2013 #62
You are free to assume the worst motives from those with whom you disagree on this issue, branford Aug 2013 #67
Inevitable is a pretty strong word. DanTex Aug 2013 #69
Conservatives like me? Wow. branford Aug 2013 #72
Most of the Democratic party? LOL. DanTex Aug 2013 #75
I'm not "caving" to the GOP on guns, I agree with them on this issue as do many other Democrats. branford Aug 2013 #80
Depends what you mean by "many". DanTex Aug 2013 #81
Guns are somewhat unique politically. branford Aug 2013 #83
I don't see much evidence for that. DanTex Aug 2013 #86
My views on guns are largely irrelevant here in Manhattan. branford Aug 2013 #90
Bogus' theory has been savaged by respected historians for the partisan crap it is. X_Digger Aug 2013 #13
That's a pretty devastating debunking of the OP (nt) Nye Bevan Aug 2013 #17
Agreed. The assertion related in the OP is revisionist horseshit. (nt) Lizzie Poppet Aug 2013 #18
By "respected Historians" ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #19
Do you have a link to the work of these "respected historians"? pnwmom Aug 2013 #21
Pick up any Sanford Levinson, William Van Alstyne, or Laurence Tribe treatise on the subject. X_Digger Aug 2013 #33
Flawed report ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #39
Read it for yourself and decide- X_Digger Aug 2013 #42
Both ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #44
Dear, my words are generally my own. I use DU's 'excerpt' to denote a cut and paste. X_Digger Aug 2013 #46
Generally your own ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #48
Lol, two sentences about two states (well three _sentences_). X_Digger Aug 2013 #51
"Research methods" ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #52
I'm not citing Kopel's opinion, I'm citing Kopel citing *state constitutions* X_Digger Aug 2013 #56
Does Kopel disagree with Bogus on the motivation of slavery? ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #64
That was the book, yep. X_Digger Aug 2013 #65
I still don't see why Vermont's state Constitution has to do with Virginia in 1788 ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #68
I've always only quoted Kopel for the state constitutions- to say otherwise is disingenuous. X_Digger Aug 2013 #76
Quite different motivations and wording ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #85
Semantic self-perturbation. X_Digger Aug 2013 #92
An example of the tyranny that is being sold us under the label of liberty. freshwest Aug 2013 #20
Wow. rrneck Aug 2013 #23
Unless they get stopped and frisked in NYC that is Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #28
Thanks for the exceptional O.P. n/t Judi Lynn Aug 2013 #25
I've been saying that for years... Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #27
"There really can't be any doubt." Really? branford Aug 2013 #38
An overstatement.. OK.. but still valid Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #40
I'm certainly not going to defend slaveholders . . . branford Aug 2013 #47
As a lawyer then, please consider this evidence Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #57
I am not asking you to agree with me, and do not doubt the sincerity of your beliefs. branford Aug 2013 #63
Lots of stuff in there Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #94
Cue the gun trolls posting links to articles by Wayne LaPierre "debunking" this... DanTex Aug 2013 #31
When a DUer pointed out above that MA inserted the right to bear arms into its constitution in 1780, Nye Bevan Aug 2013 #32
Well, maybe not. factsarenotfair Aug 2013 #41
Interesting.... thanks. I often learn stuff at DU (nt) Nye Bevan Aug 2013 #43
Who needs Wayne LaPierre when we have the research and writings of Lawrence Tribe? branford Aug 2013 #36
This is an inherently intellectually dishonest argument Taitertots Aug 2013 #35
Thank you for pointing that out. 1-Old-Man Aug 2013 #37
Yeah, but it makes a nice bookend..... Paladin Aug 2013 #45
Gun control sometimes was and is racist- just not always. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #50
That isn't/wasn't how the Gun Enthusiasts present/presented it. Paladin Aug 2013 #97
I am/was sure you do/did friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #101
The true meaning of the 2nd amendment will be revealed in 24 business hours. tritsofme Aug 2013 #53
The war on The Second Amendment (among others) continues. Skip Intro Aug 2013 #54
Shhh. Not so loud. NutmegYankee Aug 2013 #61
Ludicrous and irrelevant. nt Demo_Chris Aug 2013 #60
Pure nonsense. former9thward Aug 2013 #66
Madison is a dead old slave owner. What would he know? /sarc branford Aug 2013 #70
Doesn't really matter on the original intent of the amendment. roamer65 Aug 2013 #71
Be very careful what you wish for . . . branford Aug 2013 #74
Partly right...insurrections, invasions, enforcing the laws. jmg257 Aug 2013 #73
Your effort to repeal 2A is futile. GreenStormCloud Aug 2013 #82
In fairness, there's also the more leisurely route of a full Constitutional Convention . . . branford Aug 2013 #84
Sounds fitting. My experience leads me to believe most gun lovers are also bigots, especially Hoyt Aug 2013 #87
This message was self-deleted by its author tumtum Aug 2013 #89
I'd always Understood it as the Original Dads Wolf Frankula Aug 2013 #88
The Founders greatly feared the corrupting power of a strong, unrestrained central government. branford Aug 2013 #91
And even then, only piecemeal.. X_Digger Aug 2013 #93
It Has Been Argued the SCOTUS was in error Wolf Frankula Aug 2013 #104
exactly that's why it's so closely identified w the South and racist groups today. librechik Aug 2013 #95
Or . . . branford Aug 2013 #99
or librechik Aug 2013 #100
Which is precisely my point. branford Aug 2013 #102
And they hate mstinamotorcity2 Aug 2013 #103
I don't like the fact that the second amendment appears via Thom Hartman to preserve slave militia midnight Aug 2013 #105
That is discouraging, but I guess not too surprising. n/t pnwmom Aug 2013 #106
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Thom Hartman: The 2nd Ame...»Reply #66