doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Are these liberals you guys talking about?

Jake, not to get into a detailed discussion of just where your rights to privacy end, but were you under the impression that back during WWII, you could communicate with your cousin Fritz in Germany or Uncle Hiro in Japan without Uncle Sam reading your mail? That great liberal FDR had thousands of Americans placed in "relocation camps"--just because they happened to be Japanese-Americans. And while much has been made of "secret prisons" and harsh interrogation techniques in the current war on terror, you might want to review what FDR did to a group of German saboteurs--guys that never even attempted (let alone committed) sabotage. Just to save you the trouble, they were tried--before a military tribunal, in fact--and 6 of the 8 of them were executed. Meanwhile, our British allies--as part of an operation called Doublecross--gave captured German spies an interesting choice: cooperate with British intelligence or be executed. The result was a very successful counterintelligence and disinformation operation.

What terrible things today's conservatives are doing to our terrorist enemies . . .

Here is the complete report that Pete alluded to, saved by me and reprinted.

For Friar Tuck and oher interested parties, the 2nd Amendment history in court and the 97th Congress report on the Right
Forum: The gunshop.com Double Gun BBS
Date: Nov 29, 13:52
From: Pete

to Keep and Bear Arms. The committee print is available for a modest price from the Superintendent of Documents, US Govt Printing Office, Washington DC 20402. Ask for "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms" Report of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary-United States Senate-97th Congress-second session Feb 1982.
The committee included Disgusting Democrats like Kennedy, Biden, Byrd, Metzenbaum, and DeConcini. It also in included Republicans Mathias, Laxalt, Hatch, Dole, Specter, Thurmond, and others.

The research was comprehensive and even the Democrat ranking minority member Deconcini admitted that: "The Right to keep and bare arms is a tradition with deep roots in American society. Thomas Jefferson proposed that "no free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms", and Samuel Adams called for an Amendment BANNING any law "to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms". The Constituion of the state of Arizona (Deconcini's state), for example, recognizes the "Right of an individual citizen to bear arms in defence of himself and the state".

Chairman Hatch added: "We did not make suppositions as to colonial interpretations of that Declaration's Right to keep arms; we examined colonial newspapers which discussed it. We did not speculate as to the intent of the framers of the second amendment; we examined James Madison's drafts for it, his handwritten outlines of speaches upon the Bill of Rights, and discussions of the second amendment by early scholars who were personal friends of Madison, Jefferson, and Washington and wrote while these still lived. What the Subcommittee on the Constitution uncovered was clear-and long lost-proof that the second amendment to our Constitution was intended as an individual Right of the American citizen to keep and carry arms in a peaceful manner, for the protection of himself, his family, and his freedoms."

THe term militia was scutinized and was obviously private. An amendmend that would have added the term "for the common defense" was rejected at the time of the writing of the amendment showing further proof that this was a personal right. The framers used the term "militia" to relate to every citizen capable of bearing arms, and that the Congress has established the present National Guard under its power to raise armies, EXPRESSLY STATING that it was NOT doing so under its power to organize and arm the militia.

This is examined in great detail.

As for The US Supreme Court, only three times is the second amendment mentioned under case law. In Dread Scott, it indicated STRONGLY that the Right to keep and bear arms was an individual right; the Court noted that, were it to hold free blacks to be entitled to equality of citizenship, they would be entitled to keep and bear arms wherever they went. In Miller, indicated that a court cannot take judicial notice that a short-barreled shotgun is covered by that amendment-but the Court did not indicate that National Guard status is in any way required for protection by that amendment, and indeed DEFINED "militia" to include all citizens able to bear arms. The third, a footnote in Lewis v. United States indicated that only "these legislative restrictions on the use of firearms"-a ban on possession by FELONS-were permissable. But since felons may constitutionally be deprived of of many of the rights of citizens, including that of voting, this dicta reveals little. The case of Adams vs Williams has been cited as contrary to the principle that the second amendment is an individual right. But in fact, that reading of the opinion comes only in Justice Douglas's dissent from the majority ruling of the court.

In fact, that last sentence is the only fear we have. That a liberal President would appoint such liberal judges so far out of the proper view of the constitution, that they could destroy our one liberty that keeps our other liberties free. And THAT is why we can never vote for an individual like Gore.

I'll post other excepts from time to time. The committee report also included 21 case law studies from 1822 to 1981 showing how other courts had upheld the second amendment and overturned local laws or courts that had found otherwise.

Pete

Look, don't keep bashing the "liberals." I tell ya, the concept of the RKBA is a liberal concept put forth by liberal (revolutionary) men who would, and did, fight to the death for freedom.
A free man has the right to own a gun. And, it follows that he can use that gun for his freedom.
If only the government can say who owns a gun then the government can do whatever it damn well pleases. It can be as conservative or restrictive or theologic as it wants to be and impose its will on the citizens. They will have no choice.
The concept of RKBA is rooted in freedom from oppression from governments.
Tell all your liberal friends.
We need them.

Regards, RCC

RCC: Nice try, Craig. Unfortunately, you'll never see the end of liberal-bashing on any gun BB. For folks who can't think beyond bumper sticker slogans and one word labels, 'liberal' has only one meaning, and it is bad.

I find it interesting that the most partisan, hateful, disrespectful bumper stickers, filled with nothing but blind rage are all liberal leaning hate messages. I never see the car of a conservative or classical liberal plastered with bumper sticker slogans.

David, you read different bumper stickers than I do. And then there is the internet.
Brent

Pete, I've not commented on the Second Amendment right as individual or collective because I don't know and without a consensus, here for sure, we'll have to wait for the courts to make the final decision. Whatever it is, some members feel that "natural law" is supreme.

It's a stretch to declare Canada and me as socialist. Canada, which has never had a socialist federal government, is currently under minority Conservative rule. Preceding governments alternated between Liberals and Conservatives, both more Establishment than ideologically political.

Socialist no longer even means socialist. From today's announcement of Tony Blair's resignation: "During his tenure, Blair skillfully combined the Labour party's left-wing social policies with slightly right-wing economic principles.

"There is only one government since 1945 that can say all of the following: more jobs, fewer unemployed, better health and education results, lower crime and economic growth in every quarter," said Blair. "Only one government -- this one."

Mr. Blair was the master of "triangulation"---talking one way and doing another. It's a politics familiar to Canadians and Americans. I've said in many posts here that labelling people is old-fashioned in different times, in mixed economies.

King, think of how much better the economic policies would have looked at the bottom line if so many millions had not been wasted on the registration and tracking of sporting guns. This is not a criticism of Canadians alone since we Yankees waste even more millions on useless gun tracking. What is wrong with "Everything is legal until you get caught abusing them. At this point, nothing is legal and you go to jail if you get caught with them."? A very simple one line gun control agenda.

Spot on. I also find liberal bashing disingenuous at best, when those same people enjoy driving on public roads, using public schools, and many other institutions and benefits given by liberals in the past. I'm sure liberal bashers will be giving back their social security checks also, since they hate government so much, right? Paradoxically, conservatives have been gorging on government hand outs at a rate unprecedented in history.

The point is, we all have blinders on, we are all hypocrites in one way or another whether we realize it or not, but it behooves us as individuals and free-thinking people to have an open mind before judging everything and everyone. There are so many things to be learned from an inquisitive, inclusive world view, rather than a closed, exclusive one, which is how I used to view the world. Not that I think that makes me better than anyone else, but I am certainly more open-minded than I used to be. That is why I became an ex-republican.

Life is short. Enjoy it, and the people you meet along the way. Even the liberals.

Whether "liberals" gave us the 2nd Amendment originally is water long over the dam, down the river, and out to sea. The issue is that TODAY, the gun grabbers in Congress--people like Schumer--are LIBERALS. If you poll most people who self-identify as liberals and most people who self-identify as conservatives, you will find a significant difference in which group supports RKBA.
Journalists (in other words, the MSM) self-identify as liberals at a rate of something like 85%. Is the MSM mostly pro-gun or anti-gun?

I'm quite happy with people who identify with the liberals who gave us the 2nd amendment. Unfortunately, while today's liberals may claim to identify with our founding fathers, they have a very different idea--for the most part--on the issue of RKBA.