November 27th, 2009 06:04 PM
The New Second Amendment...according to Signet publishers
So I was standing in a bookstore waiting on the Mrs. today, and was thumbing through a copy of a book entitled "The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States" when I discovered an explanation for why the general public is so confused about what the 2A says and means.
Note that the following quote is published in lieu of the actual text, there is no actual original text in the book, other than the preamble and the declaration, which is annotated heavily. Let me repeat this, there is no actual text of the bill of rights in a book titled as being a reproduction of the Constitution, what follows is presented as if it were the actual text of the Amendment.
"AMENDMENT 2: RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS
For their protection and for purposes of having a well trained militia the people of the states may keep and bear (own) arms (weapons), but the federal government and the state governments may pass laws against owning certain weapons and the way others may be used"
Horrifyingly, all of the amendments are paraphrased this way, and are presented as if they are the actual text.
Now, the first part of the paraphrase I don't really have an issue with, but its the second clause (and the fact that ITS NOT THE TEXT OF THE 2nd AMENDMENT) that I have a major problem with.
If anyone would like to complain to the responsible corporations, they are Borders Books (it was the Waldenbooks at Hanes Mall in Winston Salem, NC), and Signet Classics Printing, author Floyd G. Culling (who is identified as Florida middle school teacher in the book). Unfortunately, I am far too jaded to do anything other than bring it to the attention of others.
November 27th, 2009 07:28 PM
Modern education at it's finest. Shameful.
I am not disrespecting any teachers that may be members of this forum. I am talking about the higher levels, and NEA dictates etc.
Disgusting. (if I could find the little guy that throws up, I would put him here)
It is unbelievable that we have such indoctrination in the schools.
Reminds me of another country at another time.
I personally tried to make a difference when my kids were in school, (20 years ago) finally gave up and home schooled them.
I do agree with the jaded part.
It's a waste of breath, until the tide starts to swing to the majority.
This is the law;
The purpose of fighting is to win.
There is no possible victory in defense.
The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either.
The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental. - John Steinbeck
November 27th, 2009 07:36 PM
While I disagree with that interpretation, it is the intellectually honest one. The supreme court decided that the second amendment was not binding on the states and later refused to incorporate it.
McDonald V Chicago. may change that, but as of now - that is the legal truth.
All of the post-Heller cases, including McDonald, NRA v. Chicago, Nordyke and Maloney, have argued that the Second Amendment, in addition applying to federal jurisdictions, should also be applied against state and local governments, using a judicial process called Selective Incorporation. Selective Incorporation involves convincing the court that a right is "fundamental" by being “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” or “deeply rooted in our nation’s history and traditions” as defined most recently in the 1968 Supreme Court case Duncan v. Louisiana.
In addition to claiming the Second Amendment should be incorporated through the selective incorporation process, McDonald is unique among post-Heller gun cases in that it is asking the court to overturn the 1873 Slaughter-House Cases. Slaughter-House determined that the 14th Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause did not apply the Bill of Rights to the actions of states (and by extension, local governments). If overturned, the Selective Incorporation process would be moot and unnecessary, as the entire Bill of Rights, including the 2nd Amendment, would be applied against the states.
In attempting to overturn Slaughter-House, this case has garnered the attention and support of liberal legal scholars interested in its potential application in areas outside of firearms law.  If Slaughter-House is overturned, it is likely that constitutional guarantees such as the right to a jury in civil cases, right to a grand jury in felony cases, and other parts of the Bill of Rights, as well as future court rulings and existing federal precedent, not universally guaranteed in actions by the states would be applied against the states automatically.
"Words can be as lethal as bullets; Choose them carefully, Aim them well & Use them sparingly."
November 27th, 2009 07:43 PM
I think this is more about the publisher passing it's text off as what the 2nd Amend. actually says...... May be the way the law is treating it right now..... but FAR from the actual wording.....ok, not to far, but lots of added text that is NOT found in the 2nd Amend.
- Just one of the many services I provide!
Ever wonder why massacres never happen at a gun range??
You might find me dead in a ditch one day, but I'll be in a pile of brass.
- Stolen from Zebra64
November 28th, 2009 08:48 AM
Keep means to own,not bear. Bear means to carry. Was the book pre or post-Heller?
Originally Posted by itsatoolbox
"The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree..."
Nunn v. State GA 1848
November 28th, 2009 09:30 AM
It was copyrighted 2009...so could be pre or post Heller. Either way, they could have at least consulted a dictionary.
November 28th, 2009 01:46 PM
As Colonel Cooper would say, people teaching what they have not yet learned. Trouble is in this case the author has no desire to learn the material he professes to be expert enough to write about, and has no idea how ignorant he is on that subject.
By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: April 11th, 2010, 04:35 PM
By ShawnMoncali in forum Forum News, Feedback, Problems & Comments
Last Post: March 15th, 2010, 11:54 AM
By Theman9mm in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: December 14th, 2009, 08:44 PM
By goawayfarm in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: June 16th, 2007, 09:19 AM
By katmandoo122 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: January 13th, 2007, 06:37 AM
Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors