True, but, if there weren’t a Second Amendment, you can bet that some idiot judge (but I repeat myself) would have ruled that there was no right to bear arms.
@1: But not judges in the pre-Deconstruction days:
“The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the ‘high powers’ delegated to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power.”
— Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)
am I the only one who notices the wording of 2A is different from every other? The rest are all about what government shall not do, or shall do.
2A says the object shall not be infringed. The words clearly say NOBODY can do this.
There is no such thing as a constitutional gun law.
The Constitution proper details what the government has the power to do, the Amendments were included because, to get approval, people wanted to make explicit what the government couldn’t do that didn’t appear specifically in the text. The second amendment is there to emphasize that one of the central duties of the government was to respect the inherent rights of citizens which exist a priori to the Constitution with gun rights as the most important. The rest they settled for the reminder of the government’s duty in the ninth and tenth amendments. Pretty much everyone has lost sight of this these days, especially Lefties.
True, but, if there weren’t a Second Amendment, you can bet that some idiot judge (but I repeat myself) would have ruled that there was no right to bear arms.
@1: But not judges in the pre-Deconstruction days:
“The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the ‘high powers’ delegated to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power.”
— Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)
am I the only one who notices the wording of 2A is different from every other? The rest are all about what government shall not do, or shall do.
2A says the object shall not be infringed. The words clearly say NOBODY can do this.
There is no such thing as a constitutional gun law.
The Constitution proper details what the government has the power to do, the Amendments were included because, to get approval, people wanted to make explicit what the government couldn’t do that didn’t appear specifically in the text. The second amendment is there to emphasize that one of the central duties of the government was to respect the inherent rights of citizens which exist a priori to the Constitution with gun rights as the most important. The rest they settled for the reminder of the government’s duty in the ninth and tenth amendments. Pretty much everyone has lost sight of this these days, especially Lefties.