Well there you go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Discussion in 'In the News' started by tj2000, Jun 13, 2007.

  1. tj2000

    tj2000 New Member

    397
    0
    0
    Repeal Second Amendment, Analyst Advises
    By Nathan Burchfiel
    CNSNews.com Staff Writer
    June 12, 2007

    (CNSNews.com) - The Second Amendment guarantees the right of an individual to own guns and for that reason should be repealed, according to a legal affairs analyst who opposes gun ownership.

    "The Second Amendment is one of the clearest statements of right in the Constitution," Benjamin Wittes, a guest scholar at the center-left Brookings Institution, acknowledged in a discussion Monday. "We've had decades of sort of intellectual gymnastics to try to make those words not mean what they say."

    Wittes, who said he has "no particular enthusiasm for the idea of a gun culture," said that rather than try to limit gun ownership through regulation that potentially violates the Second Amendment, opponents of gun ownership should set their sights on repealing the amendment altogether.

    "Rather than debating the meaning of the Second Amendment, I think the appropriate debate is whether we want a Second Amendment," Wittes said. He conceded, however, that the political likelihood of getting the amendment repealed is "pretty limited."

    Wittes said the Second Amendment guarantee of the right to bear arms meant more when it was crafted more than 200 years ago than it does today. Modern society is "much more ambivalent than they [the founders] were about whether gun ownership really is fundamental to liberty," he said.

    "One of the things that they believed was that the right of states to organize militias, and therefore individuals to be armed, was necessary to protect the liberty of those states against the federal government," Wittes said. "This is something we don't really believe as a society anymore."

    But challenging the Second Amendment on the basis that society's circumstances have changed since the drafting would similarly open up to question all other constitutional rights, according to Georgetown University law professor Randy Barnett, who also participated in Monday's discussion.

    "The techniques that are used to show that the Second Amendment really doesn't have any contemporary relevance are absolutely available to anybody who wants to show that aspects of the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment have no contemporary relevance," he said.

    Citing the Fourth Amendment, which protects "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures," Barnett argued, "Sure it was fine that persons should be secure in their papers and effects back in the old days when there wasn't a danger of terrorism and mass murder."

    But advocates of warrantless searches could make an "appeal to changing circumstances," on the basis that the Fourth Amendment is "archaic [and] we don't need it anymore," he added.

    Barnett recommended that gun control advocates "not favor methods of interpretation [to criticize the legitimacy of the Second Amendment] that you wouldn't want to put in the hands of political opponents."

    GUNNY: You can rob me. You can starve me and you can beat me and you can kill me. Just don't bore me.

    8) 8) 8) 8)
     
  2. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,393
    395
    83
    I thought this deserved to be In The News.
     

  3. asbrand

    asbrand Active Member

    1,530
    0
    36
    While I am diametrically opposed to his point of view on gun ownership, he did hit the nail right on the head.

    Repealing the 2nd amendment is the only "legally, constitutionally" way to do it.
     
  4. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,393
    395
    83
    Bingo!

    I think this is where he gets it wrong. The first quote leads me to believe the second quote means Wittes and his circle of liberal friends do not believe in this anymore, so they unjustifiably extrapolate this onto the rest of society.

    I do have to give praise to at least the fact that he is honest and forthright in his position, which is something one does not often see from the gun control crowd.
     
  5. Adam5

    Adam5 Atlanta Overwatch

    13,288
    60
    48
    He needs to speak for himself!! There are still plenty of us who feel that it's necessary to protect our liberty from the federal government.
     
  6. legacy38

    legacy38 Active Member

    9,003
    10
    38
    Exactly.
     
  7. EOD

    EOD New Member

    77
    0
    0
    Getting rid of the 2nd would do nothing to my RKBA. My right to RKBA is a natural right and is not granted by any piece of paper. Also the 2nd is a limitation on government. None of the BOR grants anyone a right.

    Preamble to the BOR (The piece that everyone forgets)

    Congress OF THE United States
    begun and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday
    the Fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

    THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution
    RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.:

    ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
     
  8. viper32cm

    viper32cm New Member

    760
    0
    0
    I'd like to think that this is an implicit admission of defeat. Kind of like if Al Gore and the gang decided to STFU and build a rocket ship to mars (please?!).

    But it's not. We HAVE to keep the RKBA tradition in this nation strong or something like this could happen.
     
  9. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    Easy their EOD.

    They just now are starting to understand or admit to themselves one of the the "clearest statements of right in the Constitution."

    Once they understand what rights we really have, we can teach them what a right actually means.
     
  10. EOD

    EOD New Member

    77
    0
    0
    The problem is that many pro-gun people think that the 2nd magically granted them a God given right. I just get tired of seeing the RKBA as granted by the 2nd in Blogs, gun boards and the news.
     
  11. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    I understand where your coming from, just don't want to give them too much to think about all at one time.
     
  12. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,393
    395
    83
    YOU are going to like this.
     
  13. Tinkerhell

    Tinkerhell Active Member

    2,420
    2
    38
    That's a good letter MP, thanks for posting the link. Too bad it will be basically ignored by everyone it was sent to.... :(
     
  14. Mobster989

    Mobster989 New Member

    252
    0
    0
    Amen. People are either too busy enjoying themselves or providing for their family, too scared of the government reprisal, or too few to fight unjust laws. Fighting within the system takes time and money. Two things the average man doesn't have a lot of.
     
  15. zookeper

    zookeper Active Member

    2,742
    1
    38
    i agree, great letter! i forwarded the link to a few friends, good stuff-thanks!

    also agreed that most of the people it was addressed to will never read it :(
     
  16. EOD

    EOD New Member

    77
    0
    0
    Good letter. If enough of us really let the politicos know the same thing they may listen so they could get reelected.
     
  17. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,393
    395
    83

    The whole of the Bill of Rights is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals. It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of. — Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789.
     
  18. mmmTang

    mmmTang Member

    267
    0
    16
    Wow, I never knew that terror and mass murder weren't invented until modern times. I'll be sure to tell the victims of all those Mongol hordes 1,000 years ago that they weren't being terrorized or murdered en masse. Grab a history book you friggin' idiot and stop thinking that modern man is so special. There's nothing that occurs today that didn't happen back in the day in some way/shape/form, and that's why our laws were written so that people can choose to protect themselves. He's honest about his intentions, but that guy must think that the entire history of man up until recently was all sunshine and puppies.