doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Zumbo's comments

Jack (Rabbit) -

I'm no constitutional scholar either, though I've read some 2nd Amendment scholarship. Fortunately the Bill of Rights is a short collection, and a quick read reveals the word "people" used in several amendments. Seems unreasonable to argue that the word means something different from one amendment to the next. If one grants that premise, the 10th Amendment is instructive in making a clear distinction between states and people.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Historical period writings provide context for understanding the framer's meaning, and resolve any ambiguity related to modern interpretations of the word "militia". The problem isn't finding the framer's meaning. It's that too many don't care, or willfully ignore it to pursue what they believe are higher values.

I don't hold to the Platonic notion that rights exist outside the realm of power to preserve or enforce them. If the people choose other values as higher than the 2nd Amendment, they can repeal it. But the gun-haters instead choose to twist and degrade our language.

Jay

". . . or willfully ignore it to pursue what they believe are higher values." Quite right, Jay, IMO. Let he who has not sinned etc.

jack

rabbit, I'm not surprised at all...

By the sound of some of the posts on this board and the way some have ripped into each other the anti-gunners have already won.

Here's what Zumbo said...

"I say game departments should ban them from the praries and woods".


In some states they are illegal now.

Does a state law effect our 2nd Amendment rights ?

Not entirely clear how far a state or local government could go (likely farther in the 9th Cir., and not so far in the 5th Cir.), but states and local governments have a measure of power to regulate gun ownership and the view that the Second Amendment applies only to restrict federal action is pervasive.

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/2amend.php?PHPSESSID=32c6ea9ee7e8a784465a2b36d3b1f9ce

I hear Outdoor Life has fired Mr.Zumbo...I hope he sues Outdoor Life for violation of his right to 'Freedom of Speech.

What I find real funny about this whole thread is all the great minds on here ....that didn't even bother to read what Zumbo really said before they jumped up to defend their 2nd Amendment Rights.
Kind of like an angry lynch mob.

ps...Ted Blather you can put the shovel up the Levees okay for now.

The Constitution trumps all state laws, period. Rights guaranteed in the Constitution cannot be infringed by the states. But they can be 'interpreted,' and it's there - in the details - that the devil lies.

The Supreme Court has arrogated to itself the role of arbiter of the U.S. Constitution. On any Constitutional right, the Court can take a restrictive interpretation (i.e., Federal Firearms Act of 1938), or an expansive one (Roe v. Wade).

These interpretations can vary or even change radically, depending on the makeup of the court and the politics of the time. That is why it is important for gun owners to be politically active, and not just depend on the Second Amendment for protection.

The 14th amendment clearly addresses this issue. States in the antebellum south tried to use the excuse that the Constitution was only a restriction on the federal government and that the states could place restrictions on rights. It was merely a cover for the south to exclude blacks and deny them their rights. The excuse that you might hear today from local governments to violate or deny peoples rights is "home rule" or "local control".

The 14th amendment states "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."