Founding Fathers Would Have Allowed Restrictions on Guns

Founding Fathers Would Have Allowed Restrictions on Guns

This is a discussion on Founding Fathers Would Have Allowed Restrictions on Guns within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; If you look at the values and the historical record, you will see that the Founding Fathers never intended guns to go unregulated, Supreme Court ...

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 85
Like Tree19Likes

Thread: Founding Fathers Would Have Allowed Restrictions on Guns

  1. #1
    Member Array kccad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    139

    Founding Fathers Would Have Allowed Restrictions on Guns

    If you look at the values and the historical record, you will see that the Founding Fathers never intended guns to go unregulated, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer contended Sunday.

    Appearing on "Fox News Sunday," Breyer said history stands with the dissenters in the court's decision to overturn a Washington, D.C., handgun ban in the 2008 case "D.C. v. Heller."

    Breyer wrote the dissent and was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. He said historians would side with him in the case because they have concluded that Founding Father James Madison was more worried that the Constitution may not be ratified than he was about granting individuals the right to bear arms.

    Madison "was worried about opponents who would think Congress would call up state militias and nationalize them. 'That can't happen,' said Madison," said Breyer, adding that historians characterize Madison's priority as, "I've got to get this document ratified."

    Therefore, Madison included the Second Amendment to appease the states, Breyer said.



    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...#ixzz17vlLxY00
    When asked if the fans that ran on the field naked were men or women, Yogi replied "I don't know, they had bags over their heads."


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array Old School's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Florida Treasure Coast
    Posts
    3,211
    I think Justice Breyer would do well to read some of Les Adams works such as The Second Amendment Primer to better understand what the founding fathers really ment and not what he would like to think they ment colored by his liberal bias.

    http://www.palladiumpress.com/primers.asp#1
    oneshot likes this.
    "Violence is seldom the answer, but when it is the answer it is the only answer".

    "A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves".

    http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/

  3. #3
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    Thumbs down What would expect Breyer to say?

    Read his dissenting opinion.

    My question is why did Fox give him the pulpit?
    oneshot likes this.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  4. #4
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    If the 2nd amendment might have been included as an afterthought or a deal-breaker..........I don't think it would rank #2 on the list. Common sense.
    atctimmy and oneshot like this.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Array ep1953's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Kodak TN
    Posts
    1,155
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveH View Post
    Read his dissenting opinion.

    My question is why did Fox give him the pulpit?
    Fair and balanced as always. Let the people see the flawed reasoning of a left wing nut.

  6. #6
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,663
    Look, no one "knows" what 2A was meant to be because: 1) the English is so horrid the sentence makes no sense; 2) merely looking at history and events of the time are insufficient because towns, cities, putative states, all varied all over the place in real practice.

    Given #1, it is the job of the Supremes to interpret; To determine what that badly written sentence means. They have barely scratched the surface on that task. Even the most pro-gun member, Scalia, is very very cautious about how far to go. The Heller ruling was so weak it had almost no impact on real every day practices in D.C.

    What is utterly amazing is that 220+ years after the fact, and 150 years after the Civil War we can't even get to the details of what it means because we have been so busy arguing over incorporation-- till just a few months ago.

    I have read 2A a bazillion times and honestly, though I know what I want it to mean, I have no idea what the sentence itself--as badly constructed as it is and with no context-- does mean.

    Does anyone know of the existence of contemporaneous records of debates in the various state legislatures when they were considering ratifying the BOR, and if these shed light on the matter? I'm not asking about newspaper commentary of the day or commentary by leafleteers. Do we have any equivalent of stenographic recordings of the actual debates?

  7. #7
    Distinguished Member Array Der Alte's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Goldsboro, NC
    Posts
    1,843
    After years of reading, I have come to the conclusion that the 2nd Amendment was established for only one purpose and that is to protect the people from the government. Thats probably the reason so many of the liberals are against the 2nd. Without individuals owning firearms you would be at the mercy of a tyrannical government.
    Its a shame that youth is wasted on the young.

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,641
    +1!

  9. #9
    VIP Member Array packinnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,292
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveH View Post
    Read his dissenting opinion.

    My question is why did Fox give him the pulpit?
    To show him for what he is so the rest who are watching can see for themeselves?
    Know thine enemy?
    "My God David, We're a Civilized society."

    "Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the crap out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
    -The Mist (2007)

  10. #10
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,663
    Quote Originally Posted by Der Alte View Post
    After years of reading, I have come to the conclusion that the 2nd Amendment was established for only one purpose and that is to protect the people from the government. Thats probably the reason so many of the liberals are against the 2nd. Without individuals owning firearms you would be at the mercy of a tyrannical government.
    I'm sorry, but I think that interpretation is way off the mark. George Washington himself, as a sitting president, personally led Federalized troops in suppressing The Whiskey Rebellion. No government, even a brand new one, is going to allow for rebellion by the governed, and our founders put rebellion down right at the start. It was put down a second time 4 score + years later.

    I submit to you that both George Washington and later Lincoln, were much closer to the founding (George being a founder) and George knew a thing or two about what the intent of 2A was--- and he didn't tolerate rebellion.

  11. #11
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,920
    The right to bear arms.

    Its not about poor english, or some coded sentance that can be argued about for centuries. It's not even about guns.

    Its about the common man, being armed so that he never has to endure intimidation from another man that thinks because his parents were born rich, he is superior. Its about a small statured man, not being intimidated by a man twice his size or strength.

    Its not about property, as many would have you beleive.

    Its about living with dignity and not having to cower to evil in any way,shape or form. Its about every man being on an equal footing and not having to beg or succumb to stupidness.

    Evil knows this, and would do anything to eliminate the right. Evil has been successful in just about every nation but this one, and even here, this right comes under constant attack.

    Its about natural law, that makes it an instinct,to defend oneself. A law that many would have you believe that is a right given by man, when in fact,it is a right given by the Creator.

    Its about not having to care about how some old liberal guy in a black robe in a land far away interprets history, because his opinion is no better than yours.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Madison "was worried about opponents who would think Congress would call up state militias and nationalize them. 'That can't happen,' said Madison," said Breyer, adding that historians characterize Madison's priority as, "I've got to get this document ratified."

    Therefore, Madison included the Second Amendment to appease the states, Breyer said.
    Lets say just for giggles that he is correct. Would this in any way invalidate that amendment? If so would that logic not also invalidate any other restrictions that the states demanded be in the Constitution?

    Michael

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA
    Posts
    5,135
    Exactly what gun control measures did the founders enact? They certainly had the chance...
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  14. #14
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,785
    I watched it. My first thought was he was basing everything on Madison, because Madison was the closet to his own view. .... but Madison "lost the argument" and had to add the 2nd Amendment into it.... because "the states demanded it" and so did other involved in writing the Constitution.

    So, Madison was clearly in the minority. So , why would and Judge rule on something and try to use the Minority opinion of 1 founder ? That's is illogical and not a good legal argument at all. But, I guess it makes him feel warm and fuzzy.

    On top of this, Madison was NOT against the 2nd amendment, he just thought that states should be allowed to regulate them.... and the other state representatives wanted "NO REGULATION ".

    I can show you write-ups by a member of my family.... who was involved, and he clearly believed that the 2nd Amendment was needed for people to be able to protect themselves from the Govt, tyranny, and home protection. One reason may be, because his grandfather was killed when he tried to stop some English soldiers & officers from stealing and rampaging his house, as well as raping his wife and daughter. The official report was that he ran at them and tried to shoot them, the real story is.... by everyone else... he was unarmed and shot in the back , after being severely beaten to the point of near death.

    The English officers, Govenors, and King... had shown them quite well, what tyranny and a uncontrolled Govt with absolute power can do.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  15. #15
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    10,563
    Quote Originally Posted by kccad View Post
    Therefore, Madison included the Second Amendment to appease the states, Breyer said.
    That's "revisionist" history for you.

    Actually, the opposite is the case; the Anti-Federalists were far more strident in their opposition to government controls on civilian arms and argued thair position stongly. The Second Amendment we ended up with was a compromise that watered down its original words and intent.

    (Ref. The Antifederalist Papers, Michigan State University Press, 1965)
    Smitty
    NRA Endowment Member

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Random thought about the Founding Fathers
    By paramedic70002 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: October 6th, 2010, 06:58 PM
  2. My favorite quote from our founding fathers
    By UnklFungus in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: April 14th, 2010, 10:53 AM
  3. Founding Fathers conceal carry?
    By GBS in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: December 1st, 2007, 10:27 PM
  4. A letter from the founding fathers
    By JT in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: August 30th, 2005, 01:07 PM

Search tags for this page

any founding fathers against guns
,

constitution amendment not allowed to carry weapons that instill fear

,
founding father's restrictions on second amendemnt
,

founding fathers against guns

,
founding fathers on concealed carry
,
founding fathers second amendment restrictions
,
founding fathers supported public registration of firearms ray clasen
,
how long did the founding father tolerate tyranny before rebeling
,

scalia and ginsburg founding fathers gun restrictions

,
second amendment discussion by the founding fathers
,
what restrictions did the founding fathers place on owning weapons
,
why did the founding fathers dislike concealed carry of firearms.
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors