Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Place An Ad | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Second Amendment written long ago

March 31, 2013

DEAR EDITOR: ‘‘A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringe....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(316)

WarrenProud

Mar-31-13 5:30 AM

Don't drink the NRA Kool Aid. The 2nd amendment does not protect your right top own guns. In the day before the national guard, it was a way to generate a volunteer army militia in a hurry. this country needs sensible gun control laws now.

9 Agrees | 16 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Daniel

Mar-31-13 8:06 AM

Its people like Lief that make the NRA stronger and the gun and ammo makers more profitable, selling more ten fold.

Thanks Lief! I just bought 10 more, 10 round clips and another 1000 rounds of ammo because of people like you! And this was just for my one gun. I have many more.

9 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigGuy35

Mar-31-13 8:58 AM

Great letter! One of the best I've read

8 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigGuy35

Mar-31-13 8:58 AM

Great letter! One of the best I've read

8 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ArticWoof

Mar-31-13 9:15 AM

Lief, even though I do not agree with several of your comments. I will take my hat off to you sir. Your letter is very well written, direct to the point and not filled with the political rhetoric that has become what so many consider to be fact. Again, I do not agree with several of your points, but, I can agree to disagree with a person who can debate an issue smartly, professionally, and with conviction. Good job sir.

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

speedy50

Mar-31-13 9:58 AM

The VERY REASON for the populace to be well armed is to protect itself from its government. Government will encroach itself into every facet of our lives until it has full control. At some point, the people need to throw off the tyrants who will eventually come.

11 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

imback2cu

Mar-31-13 10:19 AM

..until we grow up and learn to live and share>> ***** Lief, what hallucinogens are you on. Because of the coming NWO, Muslims,& China we the people, with brains, know that there is the potential for war IN the great USA. This aggressive government wants helpless, ignorant, low information people who are willing to lose freedom and be controlled so they can share in wealth they never worked for. The second amendment WAS written to keep Americans free from a tyrannical government run by a hierarchy; a corrupt government that would try to take away our rights as human beings. Our forefathers new that power could bring corruption and wanted the citizens to be able to defend their new country and her rights from enemies within our borders as well as without. Our forefathers never wanted us helpless again(as it was when we were controlled by England) against an evil government out of control. We can't even call what we have today a government founded

8 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

imback2cu

Mar-31-13 10:27 AM

on principles that our forefathers fought for and so many died for. Our over educated idiot politicians seem to think they were silly men and are outdated. THEY ARE WRONG. These were brilliant, courageous men willing to die for what they stood for and birthed a mighty nation (with faults, but wonderful).Their words should stand forever!!The words of the constitution are timeless; no matter what THEY tell us. THEY (our president and his unethical buddies on the hill)would never die for what they stand for, you can bet you buttons on that.

7 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

imback2cu

Mar-31-13 10:32 AM

This letter of Lief's belongs back in the 60's. People will always find a way to kill each other. NEVER GIVE UP YOUR GUNS NO MATTER HOW MANY TEARS THE BLEEDING HEARTS CRY!

8 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

imback2cu

Mar-31-13 10:33 AM

Oh, but if we learn to live and love and share..awwwwwh how sweet..NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!!!!

8 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Mar-31-13 11:15 AM

Ahhh look. Leif Deepsheet off on another one of his lemming runs.

Maybe you should go read something instead of "writing" a comic book, you clown.

While you're at it take care of your responsibilities.

9 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Mar-31-13 11:16 AM

d) The Second Amendment’s drafting history, while of dubious interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms. Pp. 30–32.(e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47.(f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542 , nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252 , refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 , does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 47–54.

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Mar-31-13 11:16 AM

(b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.(c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment.

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Mar-31-13 11:17 AM

(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Mar-31-13 11:17 AM

There you go, DUMshaft.

6 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Jolene13

Mar-31-13 11:32 AM

Liemonger-Don't you have an Easter egg hunt to go to?

8 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

imback2cu

Mar-31-13 11:58 AM

Thanks liemonger. You are so correct. No time on Easter morning to be up this important nonsense that really does influence our lives. Good information for the sheeple. Have a great Easter!

4 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

imback2cu

Mar-31-13 11:59 AM

I see that the disagree-monger is out again. what a dweeb.

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Lucky777

Mar-31-13 12:06 PM

@LIER,where does Leif say we should not own guns.Your copy and paste does nothing to show his comments to be untrue.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Mar-31-13 12:30 PM

I am so glad that my great personal friend liemonger chose to use the courts to support his contentions regarding the Second Amendment. Since he has demonstrated his understanding of the courts role in determining the intent of the Constitution I know he will also agree with the SCOTUS ruling in 2008 in the District of Columbia V Heller case. In that ruling the majority opinion said in part, ... Like most rights the second amendment is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. For example concealed weapons prohibitations have been upheld under the amendment or state analogues. The courts opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitations on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places like schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Mar-31-13 12:43 PM

In Heller the SCOTUS clearly stated that the Second Amendment DOES HAVE limits and that the government can place restrictions on WHO can own a firearm, WHERE a firearm can be carried, and restrict firearms by type. They further stated that the Government CAN establish conditions on the sale of firearms. A background check would then be a condition and qualification on the sale. In a nutshell the court said YES the American people DO have the CIVILIAN right to own firearms. But that right IS NOT total or protected from certain laws.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

imback2cu

Mar-31-13 1:46 PM

His comments are from a baby perception; he is not living in the real world. .."the truth is we need guns for hunting"..LOL How many of you went hunting for your Easter meal? geez

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Mar-31-13 1:59 PM

"Liemonger-Don't you have an Easter egg hunt to go to? "

Yea, when are you open?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Mar-31-13 2:00 PM

"I am so glad that my great personal friend liemonger "

By personal friend she means someone that pays her bill via taxes since she on the gubermant dole.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Mar-31-13 2:01 PM

"I know he will also agree with the SCOTUS ruling in 2008 in the District of Columbia V Heller case. In that ruling the majority opinion said in part, ... Like most rights the second amendment is not unlimited."

You don't know anything about that.

Would you care for a refresher on militia?

DeeEEeerp.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 316 comments Show More Comments
 
 

 

I am looking for: