Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: 2nd Am history: Until 1959, every law review article concluded it didn't guarantee an individ right [View all]sarisataka
(21,340 posts)41. We may be reaching the same point
DoJ 1938 amicus brief: Second Amendment does not grant to the people the right to keep and bear arms, but merely recognizes the prior existence of that right and prohibits its {militial} infringement by Congress
The Amendment does not grant a right but recognizes the prior existence. True for all rights.
Miller decision: "In all the colonies, as in England, the militia system was based on the principle of the assize of arms. This implied the general obligation of all adult male inhabitants to possess arms, and, with certain exceptions, to cooperate in the work of defence.
Note the wording, adult male inhabitants to possess arms.
Not the militia, not to keep the lock under government control but to possess.
I am not, as you seem to think, arguing there was prior to Heller a ruling that there was and individual right to bear arms. There was not. My point is that there never was a ruling that ownership of arms was dependent upon militia membership.
I will make note of these references. It shows by Court rulings and DOJ briefs that statements indicating ownership of arms is solely dependent upon being a militia member or the idea that the arms must be kept under government control is pure fiction. Thank you for this.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
65 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
2nd Am history: Until 1959, every law review article concluded it didn't guarantee an individ right [View all]
sharedvalues
Aug 2019
OP
Yup, Scalia's opinion in DC vs Heller enshrined something made up out of whole cloth
RockRaven
Aug 2019
#1
Can we change the name of this forum? "Gun control and made-up Republican RKBA"?
sharedvalues
Aug 2019
#5
It's been considered here several times before, and shown to be false
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2019
#63
As you've seen, if ones' only strengths are 'repeated argument by assertion'...
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2019
#11
It's sad that you and 16 other people believe that law review articles actually have legal weight
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2019
#10
Thank you. I didn't have the energy to deconstruct sarisataka's many misleading points
sharedvalues
Aug 2019
#29
Wow. DOJ 1938: "2nd A does not grant to the people the right to keep and bear arms"
sharedvalues
Aug 2019
#32
Obvious answer: Because, when read in full, it doesn't say what James claims it says.
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2019
#52
Yes. Scalia was a right-wing partisan and his "originalism" was just a front
sharedvalues
Aug 2019
#31