Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 1 of 1 Posts

· Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
101,781 Posts
He's a moron. He argues that the 2nd Amendment doesn't mean what it said.

Well, the committee that wrote the first versions deliberately tabled a state militia only version, written by Sherman of CT, and put in the peoples RKBA. That right was based on the English Bill of Rights and on Blackstone, who wrote it was: "a public allowance, under due restrictions, of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation, when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression.” The US Constitution expanded on those rights by eliminating the "public allowance" part, the federal government being highly restricted from exercising any infringements of rights.

So then Stevens backs off and says maybe we need a revision to the Constitution to fix it and get rid of the RKBA? Under both arguments he just accepts the specious arguments of the gun controllers, ignores the facts that its never worked, and decides that we must suppress guns at any cost. He's either getting dotty, or a really bad lawyer, or both, because his erratic and poorly set out argument has nothing to do with the Constitution or with any other law, or the facts, but just his firearms phobia.
Three things about Stevens:

1) he WAS a pretty decent attorney, but always (like a lot of appointees) rather ideologically driven;

2. he is getting dotty, senility setting in, which tends to make him more rigid in his early ideological propensities;

3. curst good thing he is off the Court.
 
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top