May 6th, 2007 12:29 AM
NY Times article on the 2nd Amendment
There's an interesting New York Times article about how legal scholars have changed their views on the Second Amendment in recent years. One of the more interesting things that it points out is the role that liberal law professors played in putting forth the individual rights view.
While we all know what the 2A means here, what legal scholars things about it plays a fairly large role in how courts are going to interpret it. The changing view that the article talks about it really what set the stage for the decision in Parker v. District of Columbia, and I think it's something we should keep ourselves informed about.
If only as a matter of consistency, Professor Levinson continued, liberals who favor expansive interpretations of other amendments in the Bill of Rights, like those protecting free speech and the rights of criminal defendants, should also embrace a broad reading of the Second Amendment.
May 6th, 2007 12:35 AM
Sanford Levinson is the noted constitutional scholar who wrote an article called, "That Embarrassing Second Amendment," which pretty much laid out that liberals have to grant that the 2A means what it says or else be hypocrites and disengenous. It embarrasses them to have to admit that the Constitution runs counter to what they desperately want, which is all power vested in the state, with rights grudgingly meted out to the people when it suits the governing elite.
the article is here Enjoy!
From the article:
I cannot help but suspect that the best explanation for the absence of the Second Amendment from the legal consciousness of the elite bar, including that component found in the legal academy,  is derived from a mixture of sheer opposition to the idea of private ownership of guns and the perhaps subconscious fear that altogether plausible, perhaps even "winning," interpretations of the Second Amendment would present real hurdles to those of us supporting prohibitory regulation. Thus the title of this essay --The Embarrassing Second Amendment -- for I want to suggest that the Amendment may be profoundly embarrassing to many who both support such regulation and view themselves as committed to zealous adherence to the Bill of Rights (such as most members of the ACLU). Indeed, one sometimes discovers members of the NRA who are equally committed members of the ACLU, differing with the latter only on the issue of the Second Amendment but otherwise genuinely sharing the libertarian viewpoint of the ACLU.
Last edited by peacefuljeffrey; May 6th, 2007 at 12:41 AM.
May 6th, 2007 09:11 AM
Interesting that he considers the ACLU viewpoint as "Libertarian." I always thought them to be more "Liberal" then Libertarian.
"It does not do to leave a dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him."
J. R. R. Tolkien
May 6th, 2007 09:43 AM
May 6th, 2007 10:57 AM
I agree with Ron. I've never interpreted any actions by the ACLU as libertarian.
"Society never advances. It recedes as fast on one side as it gains on the other. It undergoes continual change; but this change is not [an improvement]. For everything that is given, something is taken."
Ralph Waldo Emerson
May 6th, 2007 11:10 AM
Regardless of whatever phonetic approach you use...ACLU cannot be pronounced, Libertarian...
Stay armed...stay safe!
The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member[/B]
May 6th, 2007 04:49 PM
Only one point need be made to PROVE that the ACLU is not Libertarian, and that is that they feel that the GOVERNMENT is protected by the Second Amendment, and not the People.
You could not manufacture a more wrong interpretation of the Constitution.
May 6th, 2007 06:27 PM
The ACLU to me seems to be conveniently libertarian on some issues, but plainly left-wing liberal on others. Not consistent at all, and not really in keeping with their chosen name.
If you look at their FAQ here:
you'll see a few libertarian leanings, like being against the PATRIOT act, supporting religious freedom and freedom of speech, however their support of Affirmative Action is clearly against libertarian ideals, as is their "neutral" position on gun control which includes some words favoring "reasonable regulation" of guns, including licensing and registration(!!! That was Hitler's position on guns too).
By Beachbumcook in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: February 24th, 2010, 01:51 PM
By aus71383 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: May 25th, 2009, 02:59 AM
By dr_cmg in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: August 19th, 2007, 02:48 PM
By Smooth23 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: April 24th, 2007, 09:39 AM
By MattInFla in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: July 25th, 2006, 12:01 AM
Search tags for this page
article of the 2nd
article support second amendment
interpretations of the 2nd amendment nyt
ny times article on the 2nd amendment
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors