Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Poll

Does the 2nd Amendment give us, the people, the right to bear arms or is that right attached to being a part of a militia?

The 2A gives the right to own guns to the people without question.
 25 (67.6%)
The 2A gives the people the right to own guns only if they belong to a militia.
 9 (24.3%)
Not sure.
 3 (8.1%)

Total Members Voted: 34

Author Topic: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?  (Read 8240 times)

$Bill

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 995
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #10 on: June 26, 2008, 01:19:49 PM »
Sounds good to me.

pikey

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 11104
  • Did ya do it? Then why are ya sorry?
    • View Profile
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #11 on: June 26, 2008, 01:32:30 PM »
Project 21, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research, has been a leading voice of the African-American community since 1992. 


Really?   ???  Who knew?   :D

ETA:
On September 20, 2005, The American Prospect reported about "a brief, unscripted encounter on cable television that revealed how modern conservatism seeks to manufacture the appearance of broad public support for the narrowest elements of its agenda...Viewers of C-SPAN's Washington Journal were expecting to see an interview of a black conservative. Mychal Massie, a retired businessman affiliated with a right-wing African American organization known as Project 21, was scheduled to appear at 9:30 a.m. But Massie never arrived at the C-SPAN studio on Capitol Hill because his car got a flat tire. Someone else from Project 21 had to rush over to take his place in front of the camera. Nobody was available on such short notice except the group's executive director. This sudden change clearly stunned Robb Harlston, the C-SPAN anchor hosting Washington Journal that morning, who also happens to be black. Staring at the man who had walked into the studio and introduced himself as Project 21's executive director, Harlston couldn't help blurting the obvious on live television. 'Um … Project 21 … a program for conservative African Americans … you're not African American.' Harlston was quite right: David Almasi, the executive director and sole employee of a group purporting to speak for African Americans, was undeniably a white man."

On October 20, 2005, Media Matters for America criticized Project 21, calling it "a creation of the conservative think tank National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR)." They noted that Project 21's director is also "NCPPR's executive director, David Almasi, [who] oversees Project 21's daily operations."

During the debate over the nomination of John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court, People for the American Way said: "Project 21, the NCPPR's effort to create a 'new leadership for Black America,' seems little more than African American spokespeople with extremist views that are at odds with what the majority of African Americans care about and believe."

The noobs are so into themsleves you'd think they allready have offers at Tool, Tool, feminine hygiene product & Dumbass LLC

lsn

dissident

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #12 on: June 26, 2008, 01:56:32 PM »
I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials.
George Mason

Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state.
Thomas Jefferson


Surely context matters?

In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."

Did not the Bill of Rights come about specifically to "limit the tools" of the federal government? 

Burning Sands, Esq.

  • Global Moderator
  • LSD Obsessed
  • ****
  • Posts: 7072
  • Yes We Kan-sas!!!
    • View Profile
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #13 on: June 26, 2008, 02:04:52 PM »


Did not the Bill of Rights come about specifically to "limit the tools" of the federal government? 


It did indeed.  I find myself agreeing with Scalia on this one (can't believe I just said that in public). Not sure what Stevens was trying to get at here.
"A lawyer's either a social engineer or a parasite on society. A social engineer is a highly skilled...lawyer who understands the Constitution of the U.S. and knows how to explore its uses in the solving of problems of local communities and in bettering [our] conditions."
Charles H. Houston

A.

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 15712
    • View Profile
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #14 on: June 26, 2008, 02:17:04 PM »
OK, I just finished reading the opinions.  While I think Scalia has the better textual argument over Stevens, he pulled that blanket allowance of handguns out of his ass.  Breyer definitely has the better argument there, and he took Scalia to task on it:

Nor is it at all clear to me how the majority decides
which loaded “arms” a homeowner may keep. The majority
says that that Amendment protects those weapons
“typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful
purposes.” Ante, at 53. This definition conveniently excludes
machineguns, but permits handguns, which the
majority describes as “the most popular weapon chosen by
Americans for self-defense in the home.” Ante, at 57; see
also ante, at 54–55. But what sense does this approach
make? According to the majority’s reasoning, if Congress
and the States lift restrictions on the possession and use of
machineguns, and people buy machineguns to protect
their homes, the Court will have to reverse course and find
that the Second Amendment does, in fact, protect the
individual self-defense-related right to possess a machinegun.
On the majority’s reasoning, if tomorrow someone
invents a particularly useful, highly dangerous selfdefense
weapon, Congress and the States had better ban it
immediately, for once it becomes popular Congress will no
longer possess the constitutional authority to do so. In
essence, the majority determines what regulations are
permissible by looking to see what existing regulations
permit. There is no basis for believing that the Framers
intended such circular reasoning.

I am similarly puzzled by the majority’s list, in Part III
of its opinion, of provisions that in its view would survive
Second Amendment scrutiny. These consist of (1) “prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons”; (2) “prohibitions
on the possession of firearms by felons”; (3) “prohibitions
on the possession of firearms by . . . the mentally ill”; (4)
“laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive
places such as schools and government buildings”; and (5)
government “conditions and qualifications” attached “to
the commercial sale of arms.” Ante, at 54. Why these? Is
it that similar restrictions existed in the late 18th century?
The majority fails to cite any colonial analogues.
And even were it possible to find analogous colonial laws
in respect to all these restrictions, why should these colonial
laws count, while the Boston loaded-gun restriction
(along with the other laws I have identified) apparently
does not count? See supra, at 5–6, 38–39.

----

I also like Bryer's interests-balancing approach...Scalia gave no guidance as to how to decide future cases.

Burning Sands, Esq.

  • Global Moderator
  • LSD Obsessed
  • ****
  • Posts: 7072
  • Yes We Kan-sas!!!
    • View Profile
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #15 on: June 26, 2008, 02:43:49 PM »
Interesting. I haven't had a chance to read them yet.

Does Scalia address the issue of handguns vs. semi-automatic weapons at all in his opinion?
"A lawyer's either a social engineer or a parasite on society. A social engineer is a highly skilled...lawyer who understands the Constitution of the U.S. and knows how to explore its uses in the solving of problems of local communities and in bettering [our] conditions."
Charles H. Houston

A.

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 15712
    • View Profile
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #16 on: June 26, 2008, 02:49:11 PM »
Not that I recall...just that handguns are the "most popular."  But I'd have to go back and look.

greenplaid

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 233
    • View Profile
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #17 on: June 26, 2008, 04:29:36 PM »
Project 21, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research, has been a leading voice of the African-American community since 1992. 


Really?   ???  Who knew?   :D
During the debate over the nomination of John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court, People for the American Way said: "Project 21, the NCPPR's effort to create a 'new leadership for Black America,' seems little more than African American spokespeople with extremist views that are at odds with what the majority of African Americans care about and believe."

Do you believe that the Heller Decision is out of step with the views of most black Americans?




pikey

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 11104
  • Did ya do it? Then why are ya sorry?
    • View Profile
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #18 on: June 26, 2008, 04:43:51 PM »
Project 21, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research, has been a leading voice of the African-American community since 1992. 


Really?   ???  Who knew?   :D
During the debate over the nomination of John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court, People for the American Way said: "Project 21, the NCPPR's effort to create a 'new leadership for Black America,' seems little more than African American spokespeople with extremist views that are at odds with what the majority of African Americans care about and believe."

Do you believe that the Heller Decision is out of step with the views of most black Americans?





I don't presume to speak for most Black Americans and neither should they.
The noobs are so into themsleves you'd think they allready have offers at Tool, Tool, feminine hygiene product & Dumbass LLC

lsn

greenplaid

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 233
    • View Profile
Re: The "Right" to Bear Arms before the Court - So who is right?
« Reply #19 on: June 26, 2008, 04:54:53 PM »

I don't presume to speak for most Black Americans and neither should they.

Most 'organizations' seem to suffer from that affliction. ;)