HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » etherealtruth » Journal
Page: 1

etherealtruth

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: Tue Jan 11, 2005, 09:16 AM
Number of posts: 20,962

Journal Archives

The second amendment was not always interpreted the way it is today



http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/so-you-think-you-know-the-second-amendment

Does the Second Amendment prevent Congress from passing gun-control laws? The question, which is suddenly pressing, in light of the reaction to the school massacre in Newtown, is rooted in politics as much as law.

For more than a hundred years, the answer was clear, even if the words of the amendment itself were not. The text of the amendment is divided into two clauses and is, as a whole, ungrammatical: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The courts had found that the first part, the “militia clause,” trumped the second part, the “bear arms” clause. In other words, according to the Supreme Court, and the lower courts as well, the amendment conferred on state militias a right to bear arms—but did not give individuals a right to own or carry a weapon.


Enter the modern National Rifle Association. Before the nineteen-seventies, the N.R.A. had been devoted mostly to non-political issues, like gun safety. But a coup d’état at the group’s annual convention in 1977 brought a group of committed political conservatives to power—as part of the leading edge of the new, more rightward-leaning Republican Party. (Jill Lepore recounted this history in a recent piece for The New Yorker.) The new group pushed for a novel interpretation of the Second Amendment, one that gave individuals, not just militias, the right to bear arms. It was an uphill struggle. At first, their views were widely scorned. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, who was no liberal, mocked the individual-rights theory of the amendment as “a fraud.”
Posted by etherealtruth | Sat Nov 28, 2015, 01:10 PM (1 replies)

One question to help everyone understand the SoP for the main forums

The SoP has an exception related to most topics and indicates that "open discussion" is permitted following high profile events .... how do you define "open"? Is it truly open discussion of the broad topic or is it really "related" discussion referencing the high profile event?


ISRAEL/PALESTINE
Threads about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict are not permitted under normal circumstances and should be posted in the Israel/Palestine Group.

Open discussion of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is permitted during very high-profile news events which are heavily covered across all newsmedia.

RELIGION
Threads about current events related to religion, and threads about church-state issues are permitted under normal circumstances.

Threads about the existence/non-existence of God, threads discussing the merits (or lack thereof) of religion in general, and threads discussing the truth/untruth of religious dogma are not permitted under normal circumstances and should be posted under Religion.

Open discussion of religion is permitted during very high-profile news events which are heavily covered across all newsmedia.

GUNS
News stories (and related content) from reputable mainstream sources about efforts to strengthen or weaken gun control legislation in any jurisdiction in the United States, national news stories (and related content) from reputable mainstream sources about high-profile gun crimes, and viral political content from social media or blogs that would likely be of interest to a large majority of DU members are permitted under normal circumstances.

Local stories about gun crime and "gun porn" threads showing pictures of guns or discussing the merits of various firearms are not permitted under normal circumstances and should be posted in the Gun Control and RKBA Group.

Open discussion of guns is permitted during very high-profile news events which are heavily covered across all newsmedia.

SHOWBIZ
Threads about showbiz/celebrity culture which do not have a political angle are not permitted under normal circumstances and should be posted under Entertainment.

Open discussion of showbiz is permitted during very high-profile news events which are heavily covered across all newsmedia.

SPORTS
Threads about sports/sporting events which do not have a political angle are not permitted under normal circumstances and should be posted under Sports.

Open discussion of sports is permitted during very high-profile news events which are heavily covered across all newsmedia.

Posted by etherealtruth | Sat Sep 5, 2015, 08:56 PM (1 replies)
Go to Page: 1