(Untitled)

Jun 26, 2008 18:37

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ____ (2008), slip op. at 63-64 (italics in orginal; bolding added ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 8

(The comment has been removed)

habree June 28 2008, 00:53:12 UTC
That was actually in Scalia's first draft... right after "The ruling of the Court of Appeals is affirmed." Posterity begged he take it out.

Reply


bunnirabbit June 27 2008, 04:38:12 UTC
I started reading the transcript of the hearing a few months ago, but never got a chance to finish. I did like the direction it was going, though. At one point Scalia had D.C.'s lawyer admitting that, under their own argument, machine guns should be less regulated than handguns, having more legitimate use in a "militia" context!

Let us never forget that the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, its not about national defense, its not about self-defense - it is and always has been about ensuring that We The People have the means and ability to engage in armed rebellion against our own government should we deem it necessary.

The 2nd Amendment is the teeth and claws of the Bill of Rights; it is only through the 2nd Amendment that the rest of our rights are kept safe.

Reply

habree June 28 2008, 00:51:31 UTC
I absolutely agree, but you won't catch the Supreme Court mentioning that. It's just one of those things that many scholars have pointed out but the Court doesn't exactly want to draw too much attention to.

Having said that, I'll at least give Scalia props for citing St. George Tucker's commentary published shortly after ratification of the Bill of Rights in "View of the Constitution of the United States" from Blackstone's Commentaries. This is what was quoted in the Opinion:

"[The Second Amendment] may considered as the true palladium of liberty. . . . The right of self-defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine the right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."

Powerfull stuff.

Reply


talaer June 27 2008, 13:54:59 UTC
On a similar note, let's see how rapidly Washington DC's crime rate goes down.

Reply

habree June 28 2008, 00:46:26 UTC
Well... it is Washington, DC, mind you.

Reply


sigma42 June 28 2008, 00:12:48 UTC
I 100% agree with this decision, but your declaration of love for Scalia made me throw up a little in my mouth...

Reply

habree June 28 2008, 00:45:53 UTC
Yeah... I'll rephrase. I love Antonin Scalia's opinions.

Reply


mykaelus June 29 2008, 05:35:28 UTC
Log Cabiner!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up