Different Slant

B

Bob Locke

New member
Let me state up front that I know for certain that the 2nd amendment recognizes (not grants, but recognizes) the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms. I say that at the beginning to avoid the confusion that ensued when I introduced this topic in another forum.

That being said, and only for the purposes of discussing tactics and lines of thought, let us argue this from the standpoint of the anti-freedom crowd, which has taken the position that the 2nd amendment is a right of the states and not of the people individually. If this is so, then how does the federal government claim any authority whatsoever in the regulation of firearms, or ANY arms for that matter, that might be used to defend a state or states from a central government run amok? Does that not upset the balance of power between the state governments and federal government in favor of the federal government?

Seems to me that there is a pretty good argument for removing the federal government from the equation all together. Am I completely off-base here?
 
Your point is well taken. Your argument, combined with the reservation of power guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment, could be used as a 'divide and conquer' strategy.

------------------
Slowpoke Rodrigo...he pack a gon...

Vote for the Neal Knox 13
 
I completed reading a book which goes into exhaustive detail about the right to keep and bear arms.

That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right
by Stephen P. Halbrook
1994 The Independent Institute-Oakland, CA

The author traces the argumentation from the Greeks through the Romans to the English Magna Charta to the American Revolution and through the Constitution and Bill of Rights. He conclusively destroys the argument that the Second Amendment is only for the militia.

The book is tightly written from a legal standpoint, but it provides plentiful ammunition for debate. What is particularly valuable to me is the linkages the author provides among the various amendments, e.g. the Fourteenth Amendment prohibiting slavery and the Second Amendment ensuring freed slaves the right to keep and bear arms.

I highly recommend this read!!!


------------------
Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Barry Goldwater--1964
 
Bob,

Your question - "Does that not upset the balance of power between the state governments and federal government in favor of the federal government?" - was answered many years ago during the War of Northern Aggression against the Southern States when they tried to remove themselves from the overbearing Union that ruled at that time.

States rights lost and the Federal Government won. It's been that way ever since.

Mikey
 
I'll introduce the idea to an ongoing debate on another board and let you know how they react. Interesting.

While we're arguing "their" side, can anyone tell me how they explain that the 2nd is a state's right, and not the people, when "the states respectively, or to the people" appears in the tenth? Seems to me that kills any argument that the people can be the same as the state in the BoR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top