Monthly Archives: April 2014

Georgia Governor Signs Law Allowing Firearms In Public Places - Andrew Napolitano - Stuart Varney
Georgia Governor Signs Law Allowing Firearms In Public Places - Judge Andrew Napolitano - Stuart Varney Second Amendment (Constitutional Amendment) Georgia Gets Gun Access =========================...

By: Mass Tea Party

Read more:

Georgia Governor Signs Law Allowing Firearms In Public Places - Andrew Napolitano - Stuart Varney - Video

Michigan 2014 Second Amendment March

By: NEWREVOLUTIONONE

See the original post here:

Michigan 2014 Second Amendment March - Video

School Workbook Redefines Second Amendment
Judge Andrew Napolitano talks about a school workbook that has redefined the Second Amendment. Be sure to visit my blog for more great news and analysis: htt...

By: Brian Carey

Read the original:

School Workbook Redefines Second Amendment - Video

billkeyz talking about gun control the Second Amendment NRA
Info: youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/BillKeyz9 Twitter: https://twitter.com/BillKeyz Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/billkeyz #teambillkeyz: https://plus...

By: Billy Kiff

Read this article:

billkeyz talking about gun control the Second Amendment NRA - Video

Garden of Gethsemane and the Second Amendment Part 2 What

By: Dennis Cain

Original post:

Garden of Gethsemane and the Second Amendment Part 2 What - Video

The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution protects the right of individuals[1][2] to keep and bear arms.[3][4][5][6] The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that the right vests in individuals, not merely collective militias, while also ruling that the right is not unlimited and does not prohibit all regulation of either firearms or similar devices.[7]State and local governments are limited to the same extent as the federal government from infringing this right per the incorporation of the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, as part of the first ten amendments comprising the Bill of Rights.

The Second Amendment was based partially on the right to keep and bear arms in English common-law and was influenced by the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Sir William Blackstone described this right as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state.[8]

In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence" and limited the applicability of the Second Amendment to the federal government.[9] In United States v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.[10][11]

In the twenty-first century, the amendment has been subjected to renewed academic inquiry and judicial interest.[11] In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision, expressly holding the amendment to protect an individual right to possess and carry firearms.[12][13] In McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Court clarified its earlier decisions that limited the amendment's impact to a restriction on the federal government, expressly holding that the Fourteenth Amendment applies the Second Amendment to state and local governments to the same extent that the Second Amendment applies to the federal government.[14] Despite these decisions, the debate between the gun control and gun rights movements and related organizations continues.[15]

There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with capitalization or punctuation differences. Differences exist between the drafted and ratified copies, the signed copies on display, and various published transcriptions.[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] The importance (or lack thereof) of these differences has been the source of debate regarding the meaning and interpretation of the amendment, particularly regarding the importance of the prefatory clause.

One version was passed by the Congress,[24][25][26][27][28]

As passed by the Congress and preserved in the National Archives:[29]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, then-Secretary of State:[30]

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Read the original here:

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution ...

Amendment Text | Annotations

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Prior to the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller,1 the courts had yet to definitively state what right the Second Amendment protected. The opposing theories, perhaps oversimplified, were (1) an "individual rights" approach, whereby the Amendment protected individuals' rights to firearm ownership, possession, and transportation; and (2) a "states' rights" approach, under which the Amendment only protected the right to keep and bear arms in connection with organized state militia units.2 Moreover, it was generally believed that the Amendment was only a bar to federal action, not to state or municipal restraints.3

However, the Supreme Court has now definitively held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that weapon for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Moreover, this right applies not just to the federal government, but to states and municipalities as well.

In Heller, the Court held that (1) the District of Columbia's total ban on handgun possession in the home amounted to a prohibition on an entire class of "arms" that Americans overwhelmingly chose for the lawful purpose of self-defense, and thus violated the Second Amendment; and (2) the District's requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock also violated the Second Amendment, because the law made it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.

The Court reasoned that the Amendment's prefatory clause, i.e., "[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," announced the Amendment's purpose, but did not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause, i.e., "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Moreover, the prefatory clause's history comported with the Court's interpretation, because the prefatory clause stemmed from the Anti-Federalists' concern that the federal government would disarm the people in order to disable the citizens' militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule.

Further, the Court distinguished United States v.Miller,4 in which the Court upheld a statute requiring registration under the National Firearms Act of sawed-off shotguns, on the ground that Miller limited the type of weapon to which the Second Amendment right applied to those in common use for lawful purposes.

In McDonald v. Chicago,5 the Court struck down laws enacted by Chicago and the village of Oak Park effectively banning handgun possession by almost all private citizens, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment incorporated the Second Amendment right, recognized in Heller, to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense.

The Court reasoned that this right is fundamental to the nation's scheme of ordered liberty, given that self-defense was a basic right recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present, and Heller held that individual self-defense was "the central component" of the Second Amendment right. Moreover, a survey of the contemporaneous history also demonstrated clearly that the Fourteenth Amendment's Framers and ratifiers counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to the Nation's system of ordered liberty.

See original here:

Second Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw

Second Amendment: The right to bear armsWhat is the Second Amendment?There are two principle versions of the Second Amendment: one version was passed by Congress, while the other is found in the copies distributed to each individual state and later ratified by themAs passed by the Congress:A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.As ratified by the States: A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.The Second Amendment Defined:The Second Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights, which are the first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution and the framework to elucidate upon the freedoms of the individual. The Bill of Rights were proposed and sent to the states by the first session of the First Congress. They were later ratified on December 15, 1791.The first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution were introduced by James Madison as a series of legislative articles and came into effect as Constitutional Amendments following the process of ratification by three-fourths of the States on December 15, 1791.Stipulations of the 2nd Amendment:The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of the individual to keep and bear firearms.The right to arm oneself is viewed as a personal liberty to deter undemocratic or oppressive governing bodies from forming and to repel impending invasions. Furthermore, the right to bear arms was instituted within the Bill of Rights to suppress insurrection, participate and uphold the law, enable the citizens of the United States to organize a militia, and to facilitate the natural right to self-defense.The Second Amendment was developed as a result of the tyrannous rule of the British parliament. Colonists were often oppressed and forced to pay unjust taxes at the hand of the unruly parliament. As a result, the American people yearned for an Amendment that would guarantee them the right to bear arms and protect themselves against similar situations. The Second Amendment was drafted to provide for the common defense and the general welfare of the United States through the ability to raise and support militias.Court Cases Tied into the Second AmendmentIn District of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individuals right to possess a firearm to use for traditionally lawful purposes, such as defending oneself within their home or on their property. The court case ruled that the Amendment was not connected to service in a militia.ControversyThe gun debate in the United States widely revolves around the intended interpretation of the Second Amendment. Those who support gun rights claim that the founding fathers developed and subsequently ratified the Second Amendment to guarantee the individuals right to keep and bear arms. Those who want more stringent gun laws feel that the founding fathers directed this Amendment solely to the formation of militias and are thus, at least by theory, archaic.State Timeline for Ratification of the Bill of RightsNew Jersey:November 20, 1789; rejected article IIMaryland:December 19, 1789; approved allNorth Carolina:December 22, 1789; approved allSouth Carolina: January 19, 1790; approved allNew Hampshire: January 25, 1790; rejected article IIDelaware: January 28, 1790; rejected article INew York: February 27, 1790; rejected article IIPennsylvania: March 10, 1790; rejected article IIRhode Island: June 7, 1790; rejected article IIVermont: November 3, 1791; approved allVirginia: December 15, 1791; approved all

Second Amendment: The right to bear arms What is the Second Amendment? There are two principle versions of the Second Amendment: one version was passed by Congress, while the other is found in the copies distributed to each individual state and later ratified by them

As passed by the Congress:A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As ratified by the States: A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The Second Amendment Defined:

The Second Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights, which are the first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution and the framework to elucidate upon the freedoms of the individual. The Bill of Rights were proposed and sent to the states by the first session of the First Congress. They were later ratified on December 15, 1791.

The first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution were introduced by James Madison as a series of legislative articles and came into effect as Constitutional Amendments following the process of ratification by three-fourths of the States on December 15, 1791.

Stipulations of the 2nd Amendment:

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of the individual to keep and bear firearms.

The right to arm oneself is viewed as a personal liberty to deter undemocratic or oppressive governing bodies from forming and to repel impending invasions. Furthermore, the right to bear arms was instituted within the Bill of Rights to suppress insurrection, participate and uphold the law, enable the citizens of the United States to organize a militia, and to facilitate the natural right to self-defense.

The rest is here:

2nd Amendment - Laws

At the National Rifle Associations annual meeting in Indianapolis Friday, six potential Republican candidates for president touted their pro-gun bona fides and pledged allegiance to the Second Amendment.

But none got quite as personal as Rick Santorum, a runner-up for the 2012 nomination. The former Pennsylvania senator said every member of his family is an NRA member, including 5-year-old daughter Bella. He and his wife, Karen, have conceal-and-carry permits. She even owns more guns than him now.

The default gift for most men is to buy flowers on a special occasion, Santorum said. For me, the safe bet [is] ammo.

He wasnt done.

(PHOTOS: Rick Santorums career)

Santorum warned the activists against putting too much stock in the platitudes of others.

Lots of folks are going to come out when things look easy and say all the right things, he said, but when things get tough and you know that happens particularly on the Second Amendment one of the things you need to look at iswhether the person theyre sleeping with also happens to hold the same position they do on this issue.

Now, in my case, the person I sleep with is my wife, he added. That is not always the case in politics!

The crowd roared.

And I can tell you, he said, you are safe with me.

Read the rest here:

Party of guns: 2016ers speak to NRA

AP Photo

A liberal former Supreme Court justice, still outspoken and influential in retirement, is pushing to change the Constitution's Second Amendment in a way that could lead to massive gun confiscations in states.

John Paul Stevens, 94, who retired in 2010, would rewrite the Second Amendment in a way that would allow only state militia members to be armed, a radical change from the current lay of the land spelled out in several high court decisions.

In his new book Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution, being played up in the media, Stevens would make clear that only militias, not citizens, have a right to guns.

The current wording is: A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. His proposal would read: A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the militia shall not be infringed.

In his book and interviews to promote it, Stevens said that shootings like the December 2012 school slayings in Newtown, Conn., sparked his anti-gun plan and made him more passionate about speaking out against private gun ownership, especially of handguns.

He told the PBS NewsHour that federal judges should not be involved in deciding gun ownership. Well, it would be my ultimate hope that legislatures would decide the issues, and not be hampered by constitutional restrictions, because clearly, legislators are in a much better position than judges are to decide what could be permissible in different contexts.

Stevens added, The effect of the Second Amendment as it is now construed is to make federal judges the final arbiters of gun policy, which is quite, quite wrong, I think, and quite contrary to what the framers intended when they drafted the Second Amendment, to protect states from the danger that a strong federal armed force would have been able to the states of their own militias.

The National Rifle Association was quick to react. We strongly disagree with his viewpoint, said spokesman Andrew Arulanandam from Indianapolis, where the NRA is holding it's week-long annual meeting. Our Founding Fathers believed that the Second Amendment is the one right that secures all the others; while former Justice Stevens may disagree with them, this remains a historical fact, he told Secrets.

In his book, Stevens claims that the court has wrongly expanded the Second Amendment. One decision he seems mad about was written in 2008 and ruled that the Second Amendment protects a civilians right to keep a handgun in his home for self-defense.

More here:

Ex-Supreme Court justice pushes gun grab, 2nd Amendment rewrite