Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Kinda like Roger and me and just as much real information being presented.

I have already had one conversation with this professor regarding incorrect information being presented to the class and he seemed to accept it, even said he would take a close look at what I had to say, but he has not bothered to correct himself in class.

Well today, going over the Bill of Rights, he stated that "most constitutional scholars agree that the second amendment clearly states that this is a collective right reserved to the states in the form of a national guard and not an individual right". He then went on to say that while there is some disagreement, that stance is the accepted one and that the Supreme Court has never ruled on the second specifically.

Well, I couldn't help myself. I attempted to once again educate him. I told him I took exception with his statement that "most constitutional scholars ..." and pointed out that it was in fact the opposite, with even some scholars who were firmly anti agreeing that it was an individual liberty and, in their opinion, should be overturned via the amendment process. I also began quoting both Madison and Mason, specifically Mason's definition of the militia. I thought he would appreciate that as he frequently attempts to speak about founder's intent.

All I earned for my efforts were a condescending smile and, I am quite sure, intense scrutiny on the essay portion of the upcoming test. And what were all the young students doing during this? Why rapidly taking notes of everything that came out of this man's mouth.

To say I am angry would be a bit of an understatement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Malum Prohibitum said:
Why not bring him the list of "constitutional scholars" and the titles of their law review articles?
After this last discussion I get the distinct impression that his mind is made up and he doesn't want to be confused with the facts. It just angers me that someone so intellectually dishonest is allowed to teach a mandatory course on the constitution and government.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
760 Posts
Thorsen said:
Malum Prohibitum said:
Why not bring him the list of "constitutional scholars" and the titles of their law review articles?
After this last discussion I get the distinct impression that his mind is made up and he doesn't want to be confused with the facts. It just angers me that someone so intellectually dishonest is allowed to teach a mandatory course on the constitution and government.
How do you think certain big lies are perpetuated. In liberal academia that's not a design flaw, it's a product feature.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,609 Posts
I put this together three or four years ago. Feel free to pass it on.

Both Alan M. Dershowitz and Laurence H. Tribe disagree with your analysis that the Second Amendment is a ‘collective’ right.

(Dershowitz and Tribe are Full Professors at Harvard Law School and, arguably, the finest Constitutional scholars of this century. Tribe's ‘American Constitutional Law’ is THE text on Constitutional law. Both are very liberal, hate guns, and in the case of Dershowitz would like to repeal the Second Amendment. Tribe is an attorney for the Democratic National Committee.)

“...Tribe thinks the Second Amendment assures that "the federal government may not disarm individual citizens without some unusually strong justification." Tribe posits that it includes an individual right, "admittedly of uncertain scope," to "possess and use firearms in the defense of themselves and their homes."...â€
(‘Scholar's shift in thinking angers liberals’ by Tony Mauro, USA TODAY on 08/27/99)

Alan Dershowitz says: “[Those] who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it's not an individual right [are] courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the Constitution they don't like.â€

With respect to Dershowitz‘s statement: (1.) Five of the first ten Amendments use the phrase ‘the people’ . You would have us believe that four are individual rights and one is a ‘collective’ right with NO differentiating clause. (2.) The Constitution was designed to limit the powers of the Federal government with respect to the several States and, more importantly, the individual citizen (‘the people’).
Have fun with Prof. Libtard. BTW, is he tenured? If you can't educate him, get rid of him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
760 Posts
The only way to get rid of him would be to drop the class.

I would be shocked if someone could get a professor fired for upholding the liberal side of this issue. Even if it is wrong.
 
1 - 7 of 7 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