
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
VA: Focus should be on actual 2nd Amendment
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
We are hearing much about Second Amendment sanctuaries, but we hear little about the Second Amendment itself. A proper understanding of this amendment, complex as it is, would shed a totally different light on the idea of “sanctuaries.”
Historically, the Second Amendment was interpreted by the courts as a collective right, basically supporting the ability of states to raise militias. This changed in 2008, when in a case called Heller v. District of Columbia, the Supreme Court asserted for the first time an individual’s right to bear arms, and invalidated the District’s strong gun control legislation. |
Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(12/27/2019)
|
There was NEVER a collective view of the 2A. It states "the right OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." That means WE, the PEOPLE. THE PEOPLE, who also are protected by the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments. Those are NOT collective rights, they're individual rights. And so is the Second Amendment. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|