Saf Calls Chicago Tribune Plea To Repeal 2a ‘unconscionable’ - Page 2

Saf Calls Chicago Tribune Plea To Repeal 2a ‘unconscionable’

This is a discussion on Saf Calls Chicago Tribune Plea To Repeal 2a ‘unconscionable’ within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; The original Pennsylvania Constitution predates the Second Amendment so that anyone that ever had any doubt as to the exact intent of the Second Amendment ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 19 of 19

Thread: Saf Calls Chicago Tribune Plea To Repeal 2a ‘unconscionable’

  1. #16
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,888
    The original Pennsylvania Constitution predates the Second Amendment so that anyone that ever had any doubt as to the exact intent of the Second Amendment (which was not adopted until December of 1791) concerning the right of an individual citizen to keep and bear arms needs only to read the Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania Declaration Of Rights of the people.

    Constitution of Pennsylvania - September 28, 1776

    The original 1776 PA Constitution

    > XIII. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state;
    and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up;
    And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

    Later changed to:

    Right to Bear Arms
    Section 21.


    > The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.

    And then also keep in mind that EIGHT of the original Signers Of The Constitution were from Pennsylvania.
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ


  2. #17
    VIP Member
    Array falcon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,484
    I too think it is unlikely that DC v. Heller would be immediately overturned. There is, however, a path it could quickly be done. If one of the majority justices were to leave the court, and if the elections in November were to go a certain way, and if certain justices get nominated and confirmed, and if the liberal Ninth Circuit were to stay true to form on the almost certain appeal of whatever decisions are made regarding San Francisco's handgun ban, another case could get to the Supreme Court quickly.

    That's a lot of ifs, but it is possible.
    If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.--Samuel Adams as Candidus, Boston Gazette 20 Jan. 1772

    Veteran--USA FA
    NRA Benefactor Life
    Tennessee Firearms Association Life

  3. #18
    Senior Member Array Tom357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Richmond VA
    Posts
    1,068
    Quote Originally Posted by SammyIamToday View Post
    As I pointed out, in the near future the age situation of Justices is pretty well in our favor.
    In whose favor? If the Democrats carry the race, we will be faced with a Democrat President, Senate and House. With likely three Supreme Court appointments to be made in the not-so-distant future, a Democrat-dominated Presidency and Congress is not likely to select conservative nominees, but activist liberal judges. The result could easily be a 5-4 court dominated by "living document" believers.
    - Tom
    You have the power to donate life.

  4. #19
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom357 View Post
    In whose favor? If the Democrats carry the race, we will be faced with a Democrat President, Senate and House. With likely three Supreme Court appointments to be made in the not-so-distant future, a Democrat-dominated Presidency and Congress is not likely to select conservative nominees, but activist liberal judges. The result could easily be a 5-4 court dominated by "living document" believers.
    The Court is in our favor (conservative view of the originalist intent of the Constitution) because the three justices likely to expire or retire are Stevens, who is 88, Ginsburg, whose brain expired years ago, and Souter, a Supreme disappointment.

    Three liberal justices might be replaced and even if one turns out to be a justice in the mold of Alito, Thomas, Rberts and Scalia, the Court will have the opportunity to remove itself from the social political arena and more aligned with is Constitutional function. If all three replacements are liberals then 'we the people' will be no worse off.

    Even if the unthinkable (and unlikely) occurs and Obama is sworn in next January, it is often the case that justices do not opine as the political factions would think based on their record. Souter is a perfect example. He was supposed to be an originalist justice. It turns out he is a far left liberal.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Sponsored 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. Chicago: Daley calls for new state laws on guns
    By JonInNY in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: March 13th, 2010, 02:02 AM
  2. Chicago mayor calls for more state gun control
    By cyberdogg in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: March 12th, 2010, 04:30 PM
  3. Chicago: 87 "shots fired" calls per day
    By grady in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: June 15th, 2009, 01:09 PM
  4. ISRA: Chicago Priest Calls for Murder of Gun Shop Owner
    By paramedic70002 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: June 1st, 2007, 05:13 PM
  5. ISRA: Chicago Priest Calls for Murder of Gun Shop Owner
    By paramedic70002 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: June 1st, 2007, 05:13 PM