The Light Comes On For A Liberal
What part of “The right of PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” did they not understand?
Posted by Paul "No Fear" Weir
10/04/2007 at 09:47 AM
"More important, the mere reference to a purpose of the Second Amendment does not alter the fact that an individual right is created.”
Therein lies part of the problem in our modern world. People think the Constitution created rights, therefor, rights come from government. The founders made it clear that rights come from God and the Contitution does not create rights, it guarantees them. Both the enumerated rights and the unenumerated rights guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights would still exist even if the Constitution didn’t. Exercising them, however, would be another thing altogether, which is why the framers gave us a Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Posted by single stack
10/04/2007 at 10:40 AM
"The very idea of finding a NEW individual right after more than two centuries”????
Hey asswipe, that right was always there. It was there before all the other ones, and the other ones are only there because of it.
How about “The very idea of facing reality after more than two centuries” instead?
And if those civil liberty groups you refer to were even slightly REAL, and not merely fronts for nanny-state socialists, then a righteous decision in Parker WOULD be cause for celebration.
"raised to believe that the Second Amendment was the dividing line between the enlightenment and the dark ages of American culture”
This guy was raised backwards. The 2nd IS the dividing line; spelling it out is the greatest act of enlightenment in the whole document. What a dufus ... I think he should spell his name with a “k” instead of an “l”.
Hey! Cheer up! At least one Moonbat is finally starting to understand. It’s wonderful to see him realize that the words actually mean what they say.
I really get a kick out of seeing an argument that I’ve been using for years finally get mainstream acknowledgment.
More important, the mere reference to a purpose of the Second Amendment does not alter the fact that an individual right is created.
2nd thought - OK - so they can’t tell the difference between creating a right and enumerating a right. Considering the conventional “wisdom” of the last 50 years, this is a huge improvement. A few years ago, Laurence Tribe of Harvard penned an article titled (I think) “The Embarrassing 2nd Amendment”. In that article, he reaches the same conclusion that the rest of us found decades ago and Mr. Turley just recently arrived at. The tide is moving and it’s moving our way.
My apologies. The article was written by Sanford Levinson in the Yale Law Journal, 99 Yale L.J. 637-659 (1989). In the article, he quotes Tribe at some length and finally arrives at the conclusion that the 2nd Amendment is real.
I found this quote from Tribe himself that I think is worth considering the next time someone advocates that Judges should also be activists and rewrite the law.
Quote from Alan Dershowitz:
“Foolish liberals who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the constitution by claiming it’s not an individual right or that it’s too much of a safety hazard don’t see the danger of the big picture. They’re courting disaster by encouraging others to use this same means to eliminate portions of the Constitution they don’t like.”
No one will ever call Dershowitz a conservative, but even he recognizes what is at stake. I wonder what his old friends at the ACLU have to say about him?
No one will ever call Dershowitz a conservative, but even he recognizes what is at stake. I wonder what his old friends at the ACLU have to say about him?
When it comes to the Second Amendment, like the War on Terror, Alan Dershowitz Knows The Score.
Next entry: Break Out The Long Underwear
Previous entry: A Marine Hero Supports the War