Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: The second amendment is irrelevant- [View all]X_Digger
(18,585 posts)All you have to do is look at some of the cases..
US v Cruikshank
"This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.
Presser v Illinois
"the States cannot, even laying the constitutional provision in question out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms"
It's almost as though you think the constitution 'grants' rights. It doesn't.
See the preamble to the bill of rights for clarification-
[div class='excerpt']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.
It's a 'the government can not' document, not a 'the people can'.
No, protecting the ability to raise a well-regulated militia was why the right was protected, but that has no bearing on the right itself.
If I said, "I'm out of soda, I'm going to the store."- would you assume that stores only sell soda?