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
Quiz: How much do you know about the Second Amendment?
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="tweetr" data-source="post: 2108947" data-attributes="member: 5183"><p>#10 is wrong (and so is the Supreme Court!) The first, dependent clause of the Second Amendment makes clear that it is in fact the keeping and bearing of <em><strong>military</strong></em> (militia) arms that is protected. The Court's (flat wrong) 1938 ruling in United States v. Miller, which should have been considered as a precedent in Heller, actually makes this relationship abundantly clear: "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time <strong><em>has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia</em></strong>, (emphasis added) we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument." In other words, the Court upheld the 1934 NFA <strong><em>explicitly because</em></strong> they claimed (falsley!) that a short-barreled shotgun <strong><em>is not</em></strong> a militia weapon! Therefore, even by the backward, twisted reasoning in Miller, military arms held by the people are out of bounds for regulation by the federal government!</p><p></p><p>#11 is also wrong for the same reason. The fundamental flaw in the Christian Science Monitor's reasoning in constructing this quiz is:</p><p>The Judicial branch has not the power to amend the Constitution! The power to amend rests solely in the Legislative branch (and in the States.) Therefore a Supreme Court decision cannot be construed to grant to the federal government powers not granted by the Constitution, nor to alter or diminish a protection codified in the Bill of Rights.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tweetr, post: 2108947, member: 5183"] #10 is wrong (and so is the Supreme Court!) The first, dependent clause of the Second Amendment makes clear that it is in fact the keeping and bearing of [I][B]military[/B][/I] (militia) arms that is protected. The Court's (flat wrong) 1938 ruling in United States v. Miller, which should have been considered as a precedent in Heller, actually makes this relationship abundantly clear: "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time [B][I]has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia[/I][/B], (emphasis added) we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument." In other words, the Court upheld the 1934 NFA [B][I]explicitly because[/I][/B] they claimed (falsley!) that a short-barreled shotgun [B][I]is not[/I][/B] a militia weapon! Therefore, even by the backward, twisted reasoning in Miller, military arms held by the people are out of bounds for regulation by the federal government! #11 is also wrong for the same reason. The fundamental flaw in the Christian Science Monitor's reasoning in constructing this quiz is: The Judicial branch has not the power to amend the Constitution! The power to amend rests solely in the Legislative branch (and in the States.) Therefore a Supreme Court decision cannot be construed to grant to the federal government powers not granted by the Constitution, nor to alter or diminish a protection codified in the Bill of Rights. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Quiz: How much do you know about the Second Amendment?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
