Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Excellent Analysis from David Hardy...

...at Arms & the Law:
The Supreme Court obviously wanted to be very precise. That likely explains why it skipped announcing last week, they had to work on it, perhaps negotiations between Justices on the precise wording. I suspect the wording is the result of a lot of careful thinking.

The reference to "Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated
with any state-regulated militia..." is good. Implicit in that is that the old collective right theory (that Second Amendment rights are rights of states only) is off the table. We're down to sophisticated collective rights vs. individual rights. And I might even venture a guess that the Court is showing favor for individual rights here. The sentence presupposes that there are "Second Amendment rights of individuals." There's no "if any" language in there. Read literally, it presupposes that individuals not in such a militia do have second amendment rights... the only question is whether the laws violate those rights. But that may be reading too much into the wording... then again, it was probably the result of some careful thinking, and negotiation.
Read the whole thing!


Fiftycal said...

We stand on the threshold. Amazlingly, for more than 200 years, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has not made a real ruling on what the Second Amendment "means". Does "the right of the people" mean the RIGHT of the people? I saw this in my American Government class in about 1964. I wondered why this was not clear then.

Well the whores at the anti-gun camp trotted out their blood money plea instantly. They know the jig is up. WHEN SCOTUS rules that the RIGHT to keep and bear arms is an INDIVIDUAL right, the dominoes topple.

But NRA does not have to worry. NRA/ILA FOUGHT cert for this case. They didn't want the golden goose to go away. Well, it won't. It's been 70 years since the bogus Miller ruling. WHEN SCOTUS defines the Second Amendment as an personnal "right", many decades will go by before all the unconstitutional laws are defeated.

The big loser (as they always have been) will be the "brady" campaign. Their few contributors will bail on them and those lusers will have to try and shill globull warming or something.


Fiftycal said...

I forgot. HIGH PRAISE to the CATO Institute! And PERSONAL THANKS to the lawyers that will not take money to pursue this case!

Health News said...

I really appreciate the blog since the first time do I saw it. Now they have reached another milestone which lead us to report about it, and I think it's a great new... as the content of the text.