The Rabbi
Member
And the law recognizes this remote possibility and has a mechanism to deal with it, restoration of rights.
what is your thoughts on this
- Thread starter deduke1907
- Start date
Pasifikawv
Member
Back to topic... The "individual" RTKBA has been affirmed by SCOTUS. Settled law. No further discussion needed. It is settled. See Heller. Any attempt to use the "collective" right arguement to restrict 2A rights/priveledges due to the "militia" clause preceeding the "rights of the people" is simply not a valid arguement.
Exactly right and to the point! I would also point out that those in this thread who support firearms rights for felons should read Part 2 of the Heller Decision. Among other things, it states that "The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill...".
So Justice Scalia, the most conservative and pro-gun Justice we're likely to see, has held that the law banning firearms possession by felons is not in violation of the 2nd Amendment.
Bullseye 2620
Member
Read It in the Original
I certainly benefitted from reading the Heller decision. It is not that long, and Mr. Justice Scalia, with whom I disagree about practically everything else, did a truly admirable job of summing up a lot of historical knowledge and research going back to the Magna Carta. His opinion is a really good source of information for countering those who still hold to a collective right interpretation of the Second Amendment. You can find it here:
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-290.pdf
One of the articles that anticipated and preceded Heller by a number of years was written by the liberal Constitutional scholar Sanford Levinson. In this article, "The Embarrassing Second Amendment," Levinson raised many of the arguments that Scalia subsequently raised in Heller:
The Embarrassing Second Amendment
This article, too, is a good source of ammunition when debating the meaning of the Second Amendment with people who maintain that there is no individual right involved.
Finally, I want to recommend the following:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/conlaw/materials/amarsecondthoughts1.pdf
This is from a syllabus for a course on Constitutional law at the Yale Law School, written by Levison and some of his liberal colleagues. It makes a great case for deepening the roots of the Second Amendment by re-establishing the kind of militia service that the Founder's had in mind in the context of today's modern world.
Funny, isn't it? When you drop the bogus "conservative/liberal" labels and see the struggle as between libertarians (small "L") and statists, we find that we have many friends on the other side of the aisle.
Bulleye
I certainly benefitted from reading the Heller decision. It is not that long, and Mr. Justice Scalia, with whom I disagree about practically everything else, did a truly admirable job of summing up a lot of historical knowledge and research going back to the Magna Carta. His opinion is a really good source of information for countering those who still hold to a collective right interpretation of the Second Amendment. You can find it here:
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-290.pdf
One of the articles that anticipated and preceded Heller by a number of years was written by the liberal Constitutional scholar Sanford Levinson. In this article, "The Embarrassing Second Amendment," Levinson raised many of the arguments that Scalia subsequently raised in Heller:
The Embarrassing Second Amendment
This article, too, is a good source of ammunition when debating the meaning of the Second Amendment with people who maintain that there is no individual right involved.
Finally, I want to recommend the following:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/conlaw/materials/amarsecondthoughts1.pdf
This is from a syllabus for a course on Constitutional law at the Yale Law School, written by Levison and some of his liberal colleagues. It makes a great case for deepening the roots of the Second Amendment by re-establishing the kind of militia service that the Founder's had in mind in the context of today's modern world.
Funny, isn't it? When you drop the bogus "conservative/liberal" labels and see the struggle as between libertarians (small "L") and statists, we find that we have many friends on the other side of the aisle.
Bulleye
Similar threads
