Guns getting their day in court - Page 2 - Machine Underground -Tractor & Commercial Equipment Discussion Forum

**gunmaker** · 03-17-2008, 11:17 PM

Through a career in law enforcement with all of it's training and time in the courts, and a college level education with an interest in history I had not been able to settle in my mind what the authors of the Constitution were laying forth in the second amendment. Too much time is and has been spent in the detail of what each word means, and where the punctuation is placed.
I found a moment of clarity recently, while doing some reading on the history of the Revolutionary War. While re-reading the Constitution for the umpteenth time, the first three words of the Pre-amble to the Constitution provided clarity; "WE THE PEOPLE". These three words provide answer to the fore-fathers intent. "We the people" is us, the people. From those that layed the foundations of this Republic to those that follow in generations to come. We the people have stated, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Mickey · 03-18-2008, 02:50 PM

The case has now been heard and hopefully a little later today we'll be able to see, hear,read what was presented. From a couple news articles this AM the talk is the majority appears to favor the 2nd amendment applies to the induvidual, not the collective.

In my first post I mentioned we need to more knowledgeable about our history and then we could better tell what the founding fathers had in mind. Yesterday while at mom's a ran across a long article about the second amendment and what it ment at the time it was included into those first 10 amendments.

Reading this article it appear there was a division even at that time about where the focus was applied, the militia or the individual. Clasical Republicans (those looking back in time) focus was on the militia, they were the gentry, the property owners and their concern was maintaining an orderly state. It was the Radical republicans, like Jerfferson, that were looking forward and believed for the longterm health of the country the right to own and bear arms layed with the individual. The compromise ended up containing the desires of both beliefs.

Here is a link to some good reading.
GunCite: gun control and Second Amendment issues

Will post the link if I can run across it again.

Mickey · 03-18-2008, 03:22 PM

Found the articel I referenced above. Good reading.

The Second Amendment and the Historiography of the Bill of Rights

Mickey · 03-18-2008, 03:55 PM

The transcript of the oral argument are now posted here. Good reading.

Argument Transcripts

Dougster · 03-18-2008, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickey

Found the articel I referenced above. Good reading.
The Second Amendment and the Historiography of the Bill of Rights

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickey

The transcript of the oral argument are now posted here. Good reading.
Argument Transcripts

To my amazement, most news reports today from both sides seem to be predicting the likelihood of an "individual rights" interpretation. I am in shock! I didn't believe this supreme court had it in them!!!

Almost starts to restore my faith in the system. Amazing.

Dougster

**gunmaker** · 03-18-2008, 05:26 PM

I understand that the tapes of the oral arguements will be posted online here:
Press Releases

Mickey · 03-18-2008, 08:26 PM

Was surprised at the length of the arguements today. Normally set for 1 hr and had increased that to 75 min and ended up at 98 mins.

I've started to read the transcript of the oral arguments. Interesting reading.

Will have to see how this story is presented on the evening news.

**gunmaker** · 03-18-2008, 10:04 PM

I read the transcript, rather engaging! I got the impression that this was a bit of intelligent, educated discourse. I actually felt some pride in the the Supremes, their discussion was informed, multi-faceted and I felt that they questioned both sides and covered a wider range than I thought they would.
My impression is that DC has lost this case, but I am anxious to read their findings as it relates to the 2nd amendment as a whole.

SkunkWerX · 03-18-2008, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunmaker

I read the transcript, rather engaging! I got the impression that this was a bit of intelligent, educated discourse. I actually felt some pride in the the Supremes, their discussion was informed, multi-faceted and I felt that they questioned both sides and covered a wider range than I thought they would.
My impression is that DC has lost this case, but I am anxious to read their findings as it relates to the 2nd amendment as a whole.

Yes, it seems to be gonig the way many predicted.

I expected the Supreme Court to be tough with DC on this one, just as they would have to be regarding a case for freedom of speech or the press and so on.

it is all gonig to depend just how far they want to write their position.
Sometimes they are known to be rather conservative, and onyl stick to a very narrow ruling as it pertains to the case brought before them, however, sometimes they suprise everyone and go to further lengths with their words, which can then have much more far reaching consequences and meaning.

I am quite interested how much they say, or don't say.

This the first time in the past 70 years they have reviewed gun laws and rights.

EDIT: Just read this tidbit:
The justices heard arguments from lawyers and other interest groups. The court is not due to give its ruling until June.