Supreme Court (2008, 2010): Gun control already dead in the water
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:27 am
That would be District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and the associated McDonald v. Chicago.
by the way, in the latter, the Left tried to argue the opposite of what they usually do when they trot out the 14th Amendment vis a vis Due Process as it relates to the Bill of Rights.
Meaning of "well regulated militia":
Meaning of "the right of the People"
Meaning of "keep and bear arms"
In other words, the early American notions of the right to keep and bear arms...
deterring tyrannical government;
repelling invasion;
suppressing insurrection;
facilitating a natural right of self-defense;
participating in law enforcement;
enabling the people to organize a militia system
...has been upheld.
Yet another reason history will be kind to Bush whether the Democrats are able to overthrow the Constitution or not.
by the way, in the latter, the Left tried to argue the opposite of what they usually do when they trot out the 14th Amendment vis a vis Due Process as it relates to the Bill of Rights.
Meaning of "well regulated militia":
"[t]he adjective 'well-regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training."
Heller, Opinion of the Court, Part II-A-2
Meaning of "the right of the People"
Nowhere else in the Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention “the people,” the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset. This contrasts markedly with the phrase “the militia” in the prefatory clause. As we will describe below, the “militia” in colonial America consisted of a subset of “the people”— those who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range. Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people”.
"District of Columbia v Heller". Supreme.justia.com. Retrieved 2010-08-30
Meaning of "keep and bear arms"
Before addressing the verbs “keep” and “bear,” we interpret their object: “Arms.” The term was applied, then as now, to weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity. Thus, the most natural reading of “keep Arms” in the Second Amendment is to “have weapons.” At the time of the founding, as now, to “bear” meant to “carry.” In numerous instances, “bear arms” was unambiguously used to refer to the carrying of weapons outside of an organized militia. Nine state constitutional provisions written in the 18th century or the first two decades of the 19th, which enshrined a right of citizens “bear arms in defense of themselves and the state” again, in the most analogous linguistic context—that “bear arms” was not limited to the carrying of arms in a militia. The phrase “bear Arms” also had at the time of the founding an idiomatic meaning that was significantly different from its natural meaning: “to serve as a soldier, do military service, fight” or “to wage war.” But it unequivocally bore that idiomatic meaning only when followed by the preposition “against,”. Every example given by petitioners’ amici for the idiomatic meaning of “bear arms” from the founding period either includes the preposition “against” or is not clearly idiomatic. In any event, the meaning of “bear arms” that petitioners and Justice Stevens propose is not even the (sometimes) idiomatic meaning. Rather, they manufacture a hybrid definition, whereby “bear arms” connotes the actual carrying of arms (and therefore is not really an idiom) but only in the service of an organized militia. No dictionary has ever adopted that definition, and we have been apprised of no source that indicates that it carried that meaning at the time of the founding. Worse still, the phrase “keep and bear Arms” would be incoherent. The word “Arms” would have two different meanings at once: “weapons” (as the object of “keep”) and (as the object of “bear”) one-half of an idiom. It would be rather like saying “He filled and kicked the bucket” to mean “He filled the bucket and died.”
"District of Columbia v Heller". Supreme.justia.com. Retrieved 2010-08-30
In other words, the early American notions of the right to keep and bear arms...
deterring tyrannical government;
repelling invasion;
suppressing insurrection;
facilitating a natural right of self-defense;
participating in law enforcement;
enabling the people to organize a militia system
...has been upheld.
Yet another reason history will be kind to Bush whether the Democrats are able to overthrow the Constitution or not.
