Colonel Dan, SASS #24025 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 How about you? July Chronicle, Page 69.http://www.sassnet.com/Downloads/14eChron/14julychron.pdfLet me know if you too are an Absolutist as I and the Founders define it?Team SASS: Preserving the Spirit of '76 Link to comment
Subdeacon Joe Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 What is the right it protects? The right to keep and bear arms. Whose right is it? It is a right of the people. What may the government do about that right? Nothing. It may not, shall not, be infringed upon. What about the militia clause? Well, what about it? It does not say "the right of the militia" or "the right of members of the militia." Nor is there a requirement for "the people" to be members of a militia. If the militia clause, the purpose clause if you will, in the 2nd limits the right only to the militia, then the purpose clause in the 1st likewise limits the rights protected there. The only purpose mentioned in the first is petitioning the government for redress of grievance: "or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Notice that that is the only one joined by an "and" not an "or." That means that it must be exercised with one of the others mentioned, and that the others mentioned may only be exercised in the petitioning of the government for redress. But no right is absolute! You can't yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater! Yes, you can. The actual ruling in Schenck v. US was that you can't FALSELY shout "Fire" in a crowded theater in order to cause panic, that is beyond the protection of the 1st Amendment. The government places no restrictions or prior restraint on freedom of speech. It only punishes those who abuse that freedom and cause harm. See also Brandenburg v. Ohio which basically overturned Schenck, Link to comment
Bad Jeemes Kelly Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 I am not, because I don't think the founders went far enough. I would like to see guns no more regulated than hammers, as they were when I was born. The 2nd Amendment doesn't give us that, even as described by the founders. Replace the word "infringed" with "regulated" and drop the "militia" part and I might say it's enough. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.