Skip to main content

View Diary: What gun control does the Second Amendment allow? (226 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  "In common use" (0+ / 0-)

    I can see an argument surrounding whether "in common use" refers to in common use by an opposing military, or by some schleb hunting deer for dinner. I don't think Scalia's opinion resolves that.

    What I can see is that Scalia's opinion refers to ordinary people bringing their own guns to training into an organized unit, opposed to an enemy trying to exert its will on our new-born nation, in an armed conflict against another nation (the Brits, most immediately at the time).

    the militia at the time of the Second Amendment ’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large.
    It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.
    Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.
    If interpreted this way, private ownership of machine guns, grenades, RPGs, should be restored.

    "Doing My Part to Piss Off the Religious Right" - A sign held by a 10-year old boy on 9-24-05

    by Timbuk3 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 08:42:09 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Plus, he is wrong (0+ / 0-)
      the militia at the time of the Second Amendment ’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service,
      Erm, no.   State militia were military groups paid for and organized by the state, the "body of all citizens capable of military service."  If you could bear arms you would feel strong pressure to join i in times of crisist, but this was a time when people had to be present to tend their farms.    

      Heck, even by the civil war they were still dealing with the problem of militia enlistments expiring on the eve of major battles (this was a problem for Washington.)  

      •  (Man, I need to put my glasses on) (0+ / 0-)

        The militia is not everybody, it is only those people who have enlisted and they enlist for specific periods.

      •  Stare Decisis (0+ / 0-)

        A phrase made so famous during the confirmation hearings of the heinous Roberts and Alito appointments.

        I hate to break it to you, but your opinion means nothing.

        Scaliea's opionion, on the other hand, means "the militia at the time of the Second Amendment ’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service" is law.

        And just to be on the record, I believe that several SCOTUS decisions have been wrongly decided.

        Corporations aren't people is a shining example.

        But, once they're rendered a decision, that's what you have to find a way around.

        Or ignore the constitution.

        Which I find abhorrent.

        Deal with the words. Don't argue with me. I'm nobody.

        "Doing My Part to Piss Off the Religious Right" - A sign held by a 10-year old boy on 9-24-05

        by Timbuk3 on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:36:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  How about getting a wrong opinion OVERTURNED? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cspivey, ChurchofBruce

          Dred Scott, for example.

          Plessy v. Ferguson, for example.

          What that takes is getting different Justices on the Court.

          Maybe Obama will get to appoint a few to replace s few conservatives.  Let's hope.

          "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave." -- Patrick Henry November 6, 2012 MA-4 I am voting for my friends Barry, Liz and Joe (Obama, Warren and Kennedy)

          by BornDuringWWII on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 09:58:33 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site