2nd Amendment Rights Not for Individuals?!

2nd Amendment Rights Not for Individuals?!

This is a discussion on 2nd Amendment Rights Not for Individuals?! within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Apparently not in Hawaii. A friend of mine sent me this wake-up piece from the 50th State... http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story....8-0bf47fbcf8d5 The Hawaii County Corporation Counsel, on 15 ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 26

Thread: 2nd Amendment Rights Not for Individuals?!

  1. #1
    Senior Member Array DirtDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Sunnyville
    Posts
    602

    2nd Amendment Rights Not for Individuals?!

    Apparently not in Hawaii.

    A friend of mine sent me this wake-up piece from the 50th State...

    http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story....8-0bf47fbcf8d5

    The Hawaii County Corporation Counsel, on 15 September 2007, initiated a "Motion to Dismiss" based on the following: "2. Young's lack of facts to support a cognizable legal theory also mandates dismissal of his Complaint. Young has no Second Amendment right to bear arms ... "the Second Amendment guarantees a "collective" rather than an individual right.

    "Moreover, since the Second Amendment protects the people's right to maintain an effective state militia, and does not establish an individual right to own or possess firearms for personal or other use, Young lacks standing to challenge Section 134, HRS."


    Oh my,
    Why is it that you always find things at the last place you looked?
    Because when you find something-you stop looking-Mooch


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array peacefuljeffrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    south Florida
    Posts
    3,168
    It is FRIGHTENING that anyone connected with the legal profession could issue such an opinion--stating that the 2nd Amendment has nothing at all to do with an individual right--given so much, well, PROOF that such an interpretation is nonsense and fraud.

    The thing that makes it frightening is that the attorneys presenting this either a) do not understand the 2nd Amendment, or b) do understand it, but are perpetrating a legal fraud by deliberately misstating the amendment's meaning and significance. And I assume that the Hawaii County Corporation Counsel is an entity that works on behalf of the state or local government there.

    Either case is completely unacceptable.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Array ronwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    816
    Hopefully the upcoming SCOTUS decision will change that false belief. The outcome will have a far reaching impact whatever the decision is.

  4. #4
    Distinguished Member Array Bob The Great's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Slidell, LA
    Posts
    1,688
    wow. talk about a pre-concieved verdict. I worry about hawaii.
    "A well-educated electorate, being necessary to the continuance of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed."
    Is this hard to understand? Then why does it get unintelligible to some people when 5 little words are changed?

  5. #5
    Senior Member Array rabywk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    St. Louis Metro Area
    Posts
    675
    If the Supreme Court does hear the DC case and rules it is an individual right then this will change
    NRA Rifle Coach
    NRA Pistol Instructor
    NRA Personal Protection In the Home Instructor

    --- Some of the friendliest people I have ever talked to are gun owners and shooters and according to the gun activists we are the mass murders and felons of the nation???

  6. #6
    Member Array Eddie A.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Arlington, Texas
    Posts
    156
    This REALLY frightens me because my wife is going to graduate from Nursing school in May and commission as a 2LT in the Army and it is quite possible that we will be stationed in Hawaii. This sucks!
    "I'd rather have my gun and not need it, than need it and not have it"

  7. #7
    Member Array 500Mag's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    418
    If the Supreme Court does hear the DC case and rules it is an individual right then this will change
    Unfortunately that's probably not true. The DC case is about the right to own and possess within your house, while this Hawaii mess is about carrying (concealed or otherwise). If SCOTUS rules on DC they will not extend into the carry aspect since that was not part of the initial suit.

    If they did then I believe that falls into judicial activism which even when it goes in our favor is still wrong.
    "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."

  8. #8
    Distinguished Member Array Bob The Great's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Slidell, LA
    Posts
    1,688
    Quote Originally Posted by 500Mag View Post
    Unfortunately that's probably not true. The DC case is about the right to own and possess within your house, while this Hawaii mess is about carrying (concealed or otherwise). If SCOTUS rules on DC they will not extend into the carry aspect since that was not part of the initial suit.

    If they did then I believe that falls into judicial activism which even when it goes in our favor is still wrong.
    While this is true, I think the important part will be the reasoning behind the opinion. If SCOTUS upholds Parker and justifies its reasoning with an individual rights 2A, that could reach well past simple possession in the home.

    I cannot see them making any direct statements on CC (and rightly so, as you pointed out), but future cases may be brought that use their reasoning as precedent.
    "A well-educated electorate, being necessary to the continuance of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed."
    Is this hard to understand? Then why does it get unintelligible to some people when 5 little words are changed?

  9. #9
    Senior Member Array ronwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by 500Mag View Post
    Unfortunately that's probably not true. The DC case is about the right to own and possess within your house, while this Hawaii mess is about carrying (concealed or otherwise). If SCOTUS rules on DC they will not extend into the carry aspect since that was not part of the initial suit.

    If they did then I believe that falls into judicial activism which even when it goes in our favor is still wrong.
    I'm hoping that speakers, such as the NRA, Second Amendment Foundation, etc., bring the right to keep and bear arms into the discussion. As a minimum the decision should be as an individual right and opening it up for further arguments.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Array DirtDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Sunnyville
    Posts
    602
    Quote Originally Posted by Eddie A. View Post
    This REALLY frightens me because my wife is going to graduate from Nursing school in May and commission as a 2LT in the Army and it is quite possible that we will be stationed in Hawaii. This sucks!
    If so don't bring any hi-caps (that can fit in a pistol) tazers, CN spray, auto knives, "assault pistol" (yeah-yeah no such thing), cans, SBR...I believe that even the military stationed there must register private weapons.

    Anther friend moved there from TX, he had to dump his MP5, SP-1

    But there is less crime there with those lo-crime mags!
    Why is it that you always find things at the last place you looked?
    Because when you find something-you stop looking-Mooch

  11. #11
    Member Array Sam Douthit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bowdon, GA
    Posts
    181
    This illustrates one of the fallacies of democracy (small d). You have a very antagonistic population of gun haters in Hawaii and also a very substantial crime rate. Rape and violence are rather high for this paradise. The numbers in Honolulu compare with Atlanta, GA and Detroit, MI. These crimes might be reduced by a concealed carry law. There are plenty of guns in Hawaii but most are owned by the crooks. It is always so in places that use democracy, and fear to control people. Fear is conjured up by the newsmedia.
    Sambo74
    SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,187
    ...important to keep in mind that is just a "motion to dismiss" and not the final hearing on that Hawaii case. Does not get heard until November. Still hope for George to prove his point and win. Go George!

  13. #13
    Senior Member Array Musketeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    701
    Quote Originally Posted by 500Mag View Post
    If SCOTUS rules on DC they will not extend into the carry aspect since that was not part of the initial suit.

    If they did then I believe that falls into judicial activism which even when it goes in our favor is still wrong.
    I don't know if I agree on this one. I too oppose judicial activism but I think we have different understandings of what it is.

    I consider judicial activism to be the rending of decisions with the goal of attaining a social change in accordance with the jurist's personal belief's and irregardless of the clear intent or wording of the law in question.

    If the SCOTUS were to go to the extra length of stating the 2A is clearly a right possessed by the individual, as originally written and intended I do not see how that it can be construed as judicial activism. There is no reason I know of that the SCOTUS cannot state their position on a point of law prior to a perfect case reaching them. Tradition opposes it but not the law. Now the statement would not have the weight of a decisions but it could certainly be used as guidance in lower court rulings on the issue in question.

  14. #14
    Member Array 500Mag's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    418
    If the SCOTUS were to go to the extra length of stating the 2A is clearly a right possessed by the individual, as originally written and intended I do not see how that it can be construed as judicial activism.
    You are right that SCOTUS will essentially be determining if the 2A is a individual right vs. collective right, which I'm sure we all agree its the former. However, they will not go the extra length to determine anything on the constitutionality of the carrying of firearms since the case is strictly related to the DC law that bans the ownership of handguns.

    And I agree with previously stated opinions that a ruling in our favor from SCOTUS of the individual's right to possess firearms would be a monumental building block for our right as it applies to other aspects, such as concealed carry. As this relates to the original thread, Hawaii would have to change there reasoning of denying an applicant the right to carry assuming SCOTUS rules in favor of Parker.
    "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."

  15. #15
    Ex Member Array TC_FLA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    P.C.B., Florida
    Posts
    92
    Just goes to show you, Judges and lawyers are not for yor rights.

Page 1 of 2 12 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. A Good Day for AZ and 2nd Amendment Rights
    By SpencerB in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: July 29th, 2010, 04:07 PM
  2. Vote for 2nd Amendment rights
    By advantage1one in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: July 23rd, 2009, 11:45 AM
  3. Will our 2nd Amendment rights survive....
    By P7fanatic in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: February 27th, 2009, 10:28 AM
  4. USA Poll: Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms?
    By Acujeff in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: December 5th, 2007, 08:56 AM