doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Are these liberals you guys talking about?

New York Times today leading with:

"A Liberal Case for Gun Rights Helps Sway Judiciary

"By ADAM LIPTAK

"In March, for the first time in the nation’s history, a federal appeals court struck down a gun control law on Second Amendment grounds. Only a few decades ago, the decision would have been unimaginable.

"There used to be an almost complete scholarly and judicial consensus that the Second Amendment protects only a collective right of the states to maintain militias. That consensus no longer exists — thanks largely to the work over the last 20 years of several leading liberal law professors, who have come to embrace the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own guns."

The story goes on but aren't liberals the bad guys? Elucidate, please.

You'll have to ask Liptak. He seems confused...

You believe what you read in the NY Times? I think the rational and scholarly study of the Consitutional intent along with what was written has helped move this issue. Additionally, a GREAT deal of credit should go to the NRA, SCI, and others who have waged a campaign for many years to protect our rights. No way is the NYT going give those guys credit!

Jim

Note the statement in the article quoted that there was a judicial and scholarly concensus the right was collective and not an individual right. That has only been true in the liberal mind, no one else bought it. Even in defeat they tried to defend that erroneous position.

"thanks largely to the work over the last 20 years of several leading liberal law professors, who have come to embrace the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own guns."

The story goes on but aren't liberals the bad guys? Elucidate, please.

Did he, or can you, name one?
Not bloody likely!
It's a safe bet the NRA was the real force behind this surprising turn of events.

Of course true intellectual liberals embrace the right to own guns. By definition, when a government gets out of control and enforces rules on the minority it is always conservative.
The US Constitutional RKBA was forged by revolutionaries who did not want a government which could control individual freedom. That was a radically liberal concept then and if you look at it honestly, is still so. RCC

To determine realistically if this group of professors are "liberal" would take more information than how they view the 2nd Amendment. We would need to know where they stand on many other issues, both Constitutional and otherwise. Not to mention that the NY Times labelling somebody as having a certain character trait or viewpoint does not make it so. In fact, based on their track record, the opposite would be just as likely.

The problem as I see it is that the Constitution is a very starightforward document in a complicated time. I try to look at thing throught the lense of common sense. The Bill of Rights is about preserving the rights of the individual, or at the very least the rights of the people in general. When they were talking about state's rights or powers they use the word "states". When they talk about the federal governement they use the term "United States", and "Congress". When they talk about the rights of the people they use the word "people". It's really a no-brainer, but because there are a whole pile of people out there who want to make their mark on the world by "interpreting" the Constitution we have a good deal of confusion on the issue. The only right mentioned in the 2nd Amendment is the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Period. If it had been intended to be a protection of states' rights it would have been written that way as it is in the 10th Amendment.

I don't think that liberals are "the bad guys" neccessarily. I do think that most of the things that liberals seem to want for our society have been proven not to work historically, or fly in the face of human nature. i.e. that if you make guns illegal all the criminals will turn them in. Or that if you provide a person with income for not working that they'll run right out and try to find a job. I would dispute that there was ever a "complete scholarly and judicial concensus" on this issue. If there were our rights under the 2nd Amnedment would have been stripped away by now. I do find it a little sad that so much credit is given to a group of "liberal law professors" for coming to a conclusion that anyone with a high school level of reading comprehension should be able to reach in 30 seconds of uninterrupted thought.

The United States was formed by revolutionaries. It just was. RCC

The Supreme Court has NEVER viewed the 2nd Amendment as a collective right. The socialist King Brown from socialist Canada may like to think so, but he is deluded. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms was investigated in the Report of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary US Senate, 97th Congress second session 2/82.There were even some severe low lifes on the committee like Teddy Kennedy, Howard Metzenbaum, Joe Biden, and Dennis DeConcini. The obvious conclusion was that it was an individual right originating as a natural right from God and guaranteed in the Constitution. Moreover, after it passed, later in the day someone tried to rephrase it as a collective right, and that was defeated.

They lost now they're trying to take credit for it. Intersting that all other 'Rights' are individual rights except the Second Amendment, To many 'sheep' have entered the legal system in this country not enough rams!!!
All the best