I decided to see what else the Federalist Blog had to say about the Second Amendment and came up with this. I know you like to try and get me to think that I am the only person who holds these opinions, but I hate to break it to you. Take it away, P.A. Madison! [...]
Archive for the ‘DC v. Heller’ Category
D.C. v. Heller: Was Scalia Honest with the Facts?
Why I hate the individual right interpretation of the Second Amendment and so should you.
Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.–James Madison It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect;–Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803). I was [...]
Sorry!
For those of you glued to this blog for Second Amendment/Gun control posts– DON’T BOTHER READING THIS BLOG ANYMORE!!!! I now use MikeB’s blog, http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/, to post that material. You will be seeing more of the things that interest me, and a few anoraks, here from now on.
Nobody else believes in the collective right theory of the Second Amendment…
Yeah, if that’s true, why are you so scared of Goodwin Liu? The obstructionists in the US Senate are fucking around with his appointment because Godwin Liu appears to agree with me that the Second Amendment applies to those well-regulated militias: The Supreme Court has seen fit to rein in some of the most activist [...]
If you saw a blind, three legged, 29 year old horse win the derby…
you’d say the race was fixed. On the other hand, I’m rather amazed at the people who are praising the Heller-McDonald decisions. For example, The Brady Organisation which will happily point out that the decision doesn’t preclude reasonable regulations. In fact, the Second Amendment protects a civic right, that is it is supposed to ensure [...]
Principles of Constitutional Construction
I found this here: None of the words are without force and effect, except those superseded by amendments, unless such amendments are repealed. Except for the statement of purpose in the preamble, every word was intended by the Framers to be legally normative, and not just advisory, declaratory, aspirational, or exhortatory. Verba intelligi ut aliquid [...]
Tyranny!
Some of my Tory stance is a joke, but I do have to admit that I have a good grasp of the colonial mindset on the cusp of the War for Independence. Additionally, I have long felt that they would believe their struggle has been betrayed by later generations. Hell, you don’t need to go [...]
Finding gold in a pile of horseshit
You know the story about the kid who is so optimisitic that when his parents give him a pile of horseshit, he goes looking for a pony with the comment “with all that shit–there must be a pony somewhere!”. Likewise, the Brady campaign tries to put a good spin on the Heller-McDonald decision and I [...]
An interesting thought
The whole Heller-McDonald mess came about because Judge Silberman decided he didn’t need to follow precedent (Sandidge v. United States, 520 A.2d 1057 (D.C. 1987)). Given the illegal nature of the Heller-McDonald decisions, why should a judge in future need to follow precedent if he dislikes it: especially if there is good reason to disregard [...]
The difference between the US and UK regarding firearms.
In the US, the reaction to mass shootings where an insane person legally buys a firearm is that gun control doesn’t work and we need to make it easier for the insane, criminals, and terrorists to buy firearms. Bill Mann at DC Weasels properly points out that: “Any country with as many mentally ill people [...]
Flip a coin!
Yeah, Scalia says that he follows the founder’s intent in interpreting the constitution. He also pretends to follow precedent, which he clearly DID NOT in DC v. Heller when he ignored Justice McReynolds: has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees [...]
Will Scalia prove he uses the Constitution as toilet paper?
The US Supreme Court has another chance to prove that US justice is not the best money can buy in the case of McDonald v. Chicago. Bouyed by its success in DC v. Heller, the Cato institute is yet again posed to prove the US justice runs by the golden rule: those with the gold [...]
"Gun Right" supporters who are critical of Heller
Since my anger with the DC v. Heller decision is pretty much based on Scalia’s playing fast and loose with the law and his alleged theory of Constitutional interpretation, I usually mention these articles in passing. You will find that most people who support Heller were in some way associated with the decision, or just [...]
That’s Laci THE dog
Proof that gun cretins aren’t that bright, one of them made the comment that “Laci owns a dog” amongst other statements that he had no fucking idea what I have written. First off: That’s Laci THE dog. And as the blurb at the tops says: A very intelligent canine. I’ve gone to court more than [...]
For SouthernFemaleLawyer
I am sure you would understand what I mean when I say I worked in USAO-DC’s Operation Ceasefire in the mid-1990s, which is a major reason for my interest in this case–along with having lived in Washington, DC during that period. Anyway, I find your use of the term “penumbral” in regard to the right [...]