Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Are you a gun controller ?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="vvvvvvv" data-source="post: 1180204" data-attributes="member: 5151"><p>Heller did not codify anything into law.</p><p></p><p>The part that I am sure you are referencing was the Court's leaving open of incorporation of the Second Amendment via the Fourteenth Amendment.</p><p></p><p>It is up to the lower courts now to incorporate the Second, and we'll likely need a split for the SCOTUS to consider it.</p><p></p><p>From <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=07-290#opinion1" target="_blank">Heller</a>...</p><p></p><p>Similar discussion attended the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 and the Fourteenth Amendment. For example, Representative Butler said of the Act: “Section eight is intended to enforce the well-known constitutional provision guaranteeing the right of the citizen to ‘keep and bear arms,’ and provides that whoever shall take away, by force or violence, or by threats and intimidation, the arms and weapons which any person may have for his defense, shall be deemed guilty of larceny of the same.” H. R. Rep. No. 37, 41st Cong., 3d Sess., pp. 7&#8211;8 (1871). With respect to the proposed Amendment, Senator Pomeroy described as one of the three “indispensable” “safeguards of liberty . . . under the Constitution” a man’s “right to bear arms for the defense of himself and family and his homestead.” Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., 1182 (1866). Representative Nye thought the Fourteenth Amendment unnecessary because “[a]s citizens of the United States [blacks] have equal right to protection, and to keep and bear arms for self-defense.” Id., at 1073 (1866). It was plainly the understanding in the post-Civil War Congress that the Second Amendment protected an individual right to use arms for self-defense.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="vvvvvvv, post: 1180204, member: 5151"] Heller did not codify anything into law. The part that I am sure you are referencing was the Court's leaving open of incorporation of the Second Amendment via the Fourteenth Amendment. It is up to the lower courts now to incorporate the Second, and we'll likely need a split for the SCOTUS to consider it. From [URL="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=07-290#opinion1"]Heller[/URL]... Similar discussion attended the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 and the Fourteenth Amendment. For example, Representative Butler said of the Act: “Section eight is intended to enforce the well-known constitutional provision guaranteeing the right of the citizen to ‘keep and bear arms,’ and provides that whoever shall take away, by force or violence, or by threats and intimidation, the arms and weapons which any person may have for his defense, shall be deemed guilty of larceny of the same.” H. R. Rep. No. 37, 41st Cong., 3d Sess., pp. 7–8 (1871). With respect to the proposed Amendment, Senator Pomeroy described as one of the three “indispensable” “safeguards of liberty . . . under the Constitution” a man’s “right to bear arms for the defense of himself and family and his homestead.” Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., 1182 (1866). Representative Nye thought the Fourteenth Amendment unnecessary because “[a]s citizens of the United States [blacks] have equal right to protection, and to keep and bear arms for self-defense.” Id., at 1073 (1866). It was plainly the understanding in the post-Civil War Congress that the Second Amendment protected an individual right to use arms for self-defense. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Are you a gun controller ?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom