Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: 35 years of gun sales, showing gun control's unintended consequences [View all]jimmy the one
(2,720 posts)guru: Here we see Breyer and the other 3 dissenting Justices agreeing that ALL THREE Heller opinions issued that June day in 2008, all concur with the individual right interpretation.
No we do not see that and no they do not concur with what you say. What we see is you guru, not being able to comprehend what breyer wrote, what he was doing when he laid forth 4 propositions which were the crux of the 2ndA argument before the court.
I immediately knew what you were talking about my last reply, but wanted to draw you in so as to expose hypocrisy and your con job. I did not lie, I said I had not seen any dissents claiming an individual rkba.
Breyer is referring to 4 different propositions which described the possible meanings of the original 2ndA, of which the 2ndA individual interpretation proposition he listed first. When breyer said the 'entire court subscribes' he was simply referring to the entire court subscribing to the 4 different possible propositions of the 2ndA argument. I list them below, from YOUR source link cornell which I consider reputable:
Breyer wrote in his dissent: IThe Second Amendment says that: 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 infringed. In interpreting and applying this Amendment, I take as a starting point the following four propositions, based on our precedent and todays opinions, to which I believe the entire Court subscribes:
(1) The Amendment protects an individual righti.e., one that is separately possessed, and may be separately enforced, by each person on whom it is conferred. See, e.g., ante, at 22 (opinion of the Court); ante, at 1 (Stevens, J., dissenting).
(2) As evidenced by its preamble, the Amendment was adopted [w]ith obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of [militia] forces. United States v. Miller, (1939) ; see ante, at 26 (opinion of the Court); ante, at 1 (Stevens, J., dissenting).
(3) The Amendment must be interpreted and applied with that end in view. Miller
(4) The right protected by the Second Amendment is not absolute, but instead is subject to government regulation.
To wit you, to explain to you what you pathetically and obnoxiously spin to pro gun ecstasy, is that those 4 propositions were the 2ndA current opionions and possibilities for the intent and meaning of the 2ndA as it exists today; 4 propositions which the entire court agreed comprised the debate, not that the entire court agreed to the first proposition. The entire court agreed that the 4 propositions were at the crux of the issue. The dissenting justices did NOT agree that the first proposition was paramount, for breyer and stevens later in the very link you posted, went on to debunk it, jeez, did you not read your own link?
In your laughable 'proof', you again took out of context and omitted the final 3 propositions, and only included the first proposition which set forth the individual rkba theory. And you expect rational people cannot comprehend and to be gullible saps to agree with you? A high school freshman would likely see it.
guru: You could have just read them for real and saved yourself the embarrassment of me proving myself correct.
Oh I read the dissents almost a decade ago. How is it that 'you' have not seen the rebuttals to your inane misinterpretation of breyer's 4 propositions for almost a decade now? it is apparently what you get from living in a far right wing world of misinformation disinformation and pathetic lies and absurdities gleaned from far right wing gunnut magazines and crap heads like alex jones and wayne lapierre-head, nra, et al.
After doing an advanced search of 'proposition' it was easy to bring up this post of yours from 7 years ago where I debunked your very argument above. In other words, you WERE AWARE that what you contended yday was a BIG. FAT. LIE. You posted the same con job on nov 20, 2015, to which I myself, debunked you then. You have a lot of stinking nerve to pull this again: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=181811
Go get a napkin wipe the egg off your face, and get a winch to pull your foot out of your mouth.