Ex-SCOTUS Judge Stevens suggests modification of 2nd ammendment

[Kirk Freeman]

I only claim to be a buck sergeant in the "Sedentary Militia",

Are you running the bayonet course by chance?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Tot, the collectivist rights argument is born.

UNITED STATES v. TOT.

 

[HoughMade]

ive heard some agrue that we all ARE, CURRENTLY serving in the militia....so we'd be ok right

It's not an "argument" almost all adult residents of Indiana, like it or not, are in the militia- see the Indiana Constitutional provision above. Beyond that, check these statutes out:

Under Article 12, Section 1 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana, the militia consists of all persons who are at least eighteen (18) years of age except those persons who are exempted by the laws of the United States or of Indiana.


Ind. Code § 10-16-6-1

The militia shall be divided into two (2) classes, the sedentary militia and the national guard, as follows:


(1) The sedentary militia consists of all persons subject to bear arms under the Constitution of the State of Indiana who do not belong to the national guard.


(2) The national guard consists of those able-bodied citizens between the proper ages as established by this article who may be enrolled, organized, and mustered into the service of the state as provided in this article. The organized militia of the state constitutes and shall be known as the Indiana national guard.


Ind. Code § 10-16-6-2

Now, I don't think we want to rely on this as the source of our rights for the reason that the Founders did not require state laws recognize a person as part of a militia for the right to keep and bear arms to exist. Rather, the right to keep and bear arms existed for the individual and it was just assumed that if needed, these individuals would make up a militia- membership in a "militia" was co-extensive with being a citizen. Simply put, if our right depends on the state law classifying us a certain way, then the state law could choose to classify us another way and remove it. That is not what the Founders intended.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Do Halbrook's Venn diagrams from That Every Man Be Armed!

I demand Venn diagrams in every thread!

 

[ghuns]

Tot, the collectivist rights argument is born.

UNITED STATES v. TOT.

I know, but I just love it when you talk all lawyerly. Of course I mean that in the straightest bro-hug, chest bump kinda way.

And I'm hungry and I love tots.

 

[HoughMade]

Are you running the bayonet course by chance?

Is that available on XBox?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Is that available on XBox?

Didn't you almost meet your Waterloo on the bayonet course? I have hit my head (with my desk) several times today so I might be wrong.

 

[red_zr24x4]

If this is what he thinks the 2nd Amendment means, then it brings into question every opinion he has ever issued, and all rulings he participated in. It is a clear misunderstanding of the document and the intent. If he's just saying that he would like to change the meaning to something else, then he's just another idiot with an opinion.

I think you hit the nail right on the head

 

[HoughMade]

Didn't you almost meet your Waterloo on the bayonet course? I have hit my head (with my desk) several times today so I might be wrong.

Yes, yes I did. At Fort Knox. On my way over a wall, my M16, equipped with an M7 bayonet took personal offense at something and as one of my size 13s caught on something sending me @ss over teakettle on top of the wall, for a split second I stared the M7 dead on as I tumbled toward the earth, it and my M16 preceding me. Having long ago developed the muscle memory to scream like a girl and blindly flail when things are scary, I whipped my M16 (then grasped only by the sling) as hard as I could to the side before the M7 could ventilate me. My Drill Sergeant, ignoring my mid-fall self-heroism, had a few choice words for me as he forcefully encouraged me to retrieve my weapon and continue on the course.

Despite my respectable time, I had to repeat the course...and then repeat it again....and then repeat it again.

So, I suppose with that level of experience, sure, I'll teach the course. Just don't expect 43 year old HoughMade to clear walls like 19 year old HoughMade...and give me a rubber bayonet. After all, I've taken the name of our force, the sedentary militia, as a mission statement.

 

[rvb]

Maybe we should modify the 1st in a similar fashion... free speech so long as you are part of a state govt sponsored media outlet? seems just as reasonable.

-rvb

d'oh.
Critics want FCC media study thrown on ?trash heap,? skeptical of changes | Fox News

-rvb

 

[mrjarrell]

I actually agree with Stephens. I, too think the 2nd should be amended. I'd like to see the militia clause taken out completely. It's unnecessary today. The militia acts put paid to that clause a long time ago. Ditch it and take a tool away from the anti's.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I actually agree with Stephens. I, too think the 2nd should be amended. I'd like to see the militia clause taken out completely. It's unnecessary today. The militia acts put paid to that clause a long time ago. Ditch it and take a tool away from the anti's.

Can't agree here, mrj... I think if we open that up to amendment, given the current climate in Washington, it would not go well for us... Much as a Constitutional Convention would be a total disaster today.

JMHO.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Mark 1911]

No, he knows exactly what it means, which is why he would like to see it changed.

He is also far from being an idiot. An arrogant, evil, douchebag, sure. A senile old man, maybe. But not an idiot.

Unfortunately that is the case with many people who have money and power.

 

[Expat]

I rest well knowing that we have 4 other members of the Court that would completely agree with him and if any of the other 5 die or leave, President Obama, the best friend of gun owners, would get to appoint the replacement.

 

[edporch]

My copy of the Indiana Constitution says,
"ARTICLE 1. Bill of Rights Section 32. The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State."

Seems pretty clear to me.

 

[beararms1776]

My copy of the Indiana Constitution says,
"ARTICLE 1. Bill of Rights Section 32. The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State."

Seems pretty clear to me.

and that would be the militia as well, as referred to in the 2nd A.

 

[beararms1776]

Can't agree here, mrj... I think if we open that up to amendment, given the current climate in Washington, it would not go well for us... Much as a Constitutional Convention would be a total disaster today.

JMHO.

Blessings,
Bill

I agree. No need for additions and subtractions. The statement is clear.

 

[Smokepole]

Really it's not a difficult thing to refute the Progressive's collectivist argument regarding the 2A. First is the REASON for the BOR to begin with. Six states refused to ratify the newly penned Constitution because they felt that it didn't go far enough in protecting individual rights. So, the BOR was born, 10 amendments to the new Constitution for the specific purpose of protecting INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS. It would have made no sense whatsoever to stick one amendment in that group aimed at protecting a state right to have a militia. And doing so would have likely started another fight amongst the delegates. NOT a desirable thing when they were fixing what was seen as a shortcoming of the new Constitution and were in the homestretch of the ratification process. Also, key phrase: "the right of the people." In each of the other amendments where the term "the people" is used, it is used to identify rights of the individual. To change the phrases connotation for one amendment would not make any sense.

Second, the country had just fought a war where the King had sought at every turn to disarm the populous so as to mitigate the resistance and they fought back largely with their own arms. Does anyone honestly believe that they would EVER let the Government control their ability to keep arms and as a result their ability to cast off another oppressive Government? Not on your life. If you were in their position would you? Only a fool would.

Third, many arguing the collectivist theory seem to think that the Founders were vague where it comes to the 2A, but all one needs to do is actually read the speeches and writings of the the Founding Fathers and it becomes crystal clear that their intention was that every man be armed and able to defend his family and country against all forms of oppression. Want to talk about an independent bunch, that would be our Founding Fathers. They lived it and weren't about to make it easy to happen again. And in reading them one will find them warning future generations of Americans numerous times against EXACTLY what we are seeing happen today in our lifetimes. They weren't stupid by any means. To quote Ben Franklin: "Those that would give up essential Liberty for a little temporary security, deserve neither Liberty nor security." And: "upon exiting the Constitutional Convention. Benjamin Franklin was asked by a woman, "What kind of government have you given us?" Franklin responded with one of the most famous quotations in history, "A Republic if you can keep it."" I'm beginning to wonder just how much longer it will last.

 

[squirrelhntr]

justice steven's suggestion is assine. We The People ARE THE MILTIA...... DUH.