Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: The Case for Gun Control - more facts about the Second Amendment [View all]TPaine7
(4,286 posts)The author of your source lied, misunderstood or was mislead.
The "change" meme is a lie. There is copious historical data, of the most unimpeachable type, to prove that the "change" is taking us back towards the legitimate historical meaning of the RKBA.
When you know the history, as I do, it is obvious when key facts are being left out. I don't doubt that the professor was the source of the information on concealed carry. And perhaps he didn't mean to use the fact that concealed carry was not considered to be protected by the Second or Fourteenth Amendments to mislead the reporter. But the fact is that open carry was always intended to be protected by the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
By focusing on concealed carry, the story gives the impression that RKBA was not an individual right apart from militia service, and that we a "changing" to a warped interpretation of history. That is a lie, and it is a lie "supported" by carefully weaved half truths and fabrications.
Of course, not everybody who disagrees with me is a liar. But if you actually know about the history of the interpretation of the KRBA, if you know that the idea of it being a militia or states right never appeared in a state or federal court opinion (with the exception of a single dissent) until the 20th century, if you know that the Court has expressed the individual rights view dozens of times, if you know that professors who by their own admission hate the idea of citizens bearing arms admit, however grudgingly, that it is a personal individual right, if you know that the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment explicilty set out to protect the personal, individual right to keep and bear arms from states (not for the protection of states)... if you know the history, it's hard not to see that the "change" meme is a lie, and that the careful omission of key facts, the careful selections of certain facts and the blatant misrepresentation of reality is a lie.
I didn't accuse you of lying. I'm not sure who the liar isthe professor, the author of the piece, or possibly other sources that colored the author's perspective and facilitated a misunderstanding of the professor's carefully selected facts, but there is a liar.
I urge you to investigate the history. It will shock you, even if you still support severe gun control as a policy. In a nutshell, the Fourteenth Amendment was never interpreted correctly and respected because the Supreme Court twisted like a pretzel to support Klansmen and their fellow travelers. The corrupt precedents set by leaving slaves to the mercy of southern states allowed 20th century judges to ignore the clear meaning of the historical record and support modern gun control. The Court still has not given the Fourteenth Amendment its full force, but it has at least incorporated the Second Amendment using the wrong clause (the same wrong clause used to incorporate the First and the Fourth and so forth).