Discussion in 'Politics' started by Ninja, Nov 20, 2007.
Why the Court granted cert:
Looks like the Nazis are getting a little antsy
Just minutes ago, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to take what could be the most significant Second Amendment case in our country's history.
Thanks to your support, your Brady legal team had already begun preparing for this announcement, but now our lawyers have swung into high gear to prepare our "friend of the court" brief.
We have a tidal wave of work to do in the weeks ahead and we need your help now.
This fight is so critical that we need to raise $50,000 by November 30. And since your gift will be going to our Brady Gun Law Defense Fund, it will be fully tax deductible!
We need your help today to build a strong Brady Gun Law Defense Fund to protect Americas gun laws. Please give today.
Earlier this year, a U.S. Court of Appeals struck down a gun law as violating the Second Amendment for the first time in American history. We believe this decision was judicial activism at its worst and was clearly wrong.
This legal case at its very core is the most important battle we have ever waged. The U.S. Supreme Court has the chance to reverse a terribly erroneous decision and make it clear that the American people can adopt restrictions on firearms in their communities.
If the Supreme Court does not reverse the federal appeals court decision, gun laws everywhere could be at risk
from the long-standing machine gun ban
to the 1968 Gun Control Act
to the Brady background check law.
to your local and state laws
like the ones in California and New Jersey banning military-style Assault Weapons
and many more.
If that happens, then your Brady Center will defend these laws in the courts as we have done so many times in the past against the attacks of the gun lobby. But now we must focus on the immediate challenge at hand as we prepare for the fight in the U.S. Supreme Court. Please give generously.
Sarah Brady, Chair
This means there will almost certainly be a ruling regarding the individual v collective right. Give the current composition of the court, its hard to see how there wont be 5 votes for the individual right view.
And while one could argue the 2nd section, its hard to see how the 1st and 3rd section do not constitute a violation of the 2nd, as they effectively ban ALL functioning firearms.
Its no wonder the anti-gun loons are scared.
If our right to security is violated by this court in favor of an intrepretation of the 2nd amendment held by some than we must do everything within our power to defend our rights against that faction even if it is represented by 5 or more members of the Court. It's possible that those on the Court will put the rights of those who hold a certain intreptation of the 2nd amendment that infringes on our rights ahead of our rights yet we must loudly declare "our right to security is just as important as your right to bear arms and if you don't agree than you can go to hell..."What about our rights? We know that some assholes who wrote the Constitution agree with these people because the faction is the same but this faction cannot continue to violate our rights from 1789 into eternity. At some point we need to stand up for our rights even if they aren't enumerated in the Constitution and when an enumerated right violates one of our other rights it is our duty to defend our own rights. I would never give up my right to bear arms but I will not give up my right to security so that others can exercise their right to bear arms in conflict with my right to security. If they don't want to balance our rights where they have the right to bear arms along with me and my right to be secure than they can go to hell.
Yes , yes, take up arms you baffoon. You will quickly learn just how few people support your bizarro world.
Seems to me the Bill of Rights is all about individual rights. Yet those who oppose individual gun ownership try to sell the Second as referring to collective rights.
The second Amendment provides States rights and Individual rights. It provides the right of every State to maintain a Militia and it provides the right of every person to keep and bear arms.
The Bill of Rights was created from close to 200 suggested amendments. Those were whittled down, combined or dropped into the 10 we got. Each one provides more than one right or protection because of that.
But the basic overriding theme IS protected rights that can NOT be taken away by a simple act of the Federal Government. And most of them are specific to the Individual. Further EVERYWHERE else in the document the term " the people" is clearly understood to mean an INDIVIDUAL right. Yet we are to believe that in the 2nd Amendment that is not true.
Every right is an individual right that we exercise collectively. Freedom of speech is an individual right that we exercise collectively as is freedom of religion and so is the right to bear arms. To claim the two are separate is a false dichotomy.
Okay, so you explained it better ....
Except that you do not need to exercise the right collectively for it to be protected by the Constitution.
ALL collective rights have an individual right as their basis, as a group of people cannot have a right that the individuals in that group do not hold on their own.
Separate names with a comma.