"Armed with the Truth" by Fred Thompson

buckeyeLCPL · May 17th, 2007, 03:50 PM

http://abcradio.com/article.asp?id=405250&SPID=15663

Quote:

If you care about Constitutional law, and everybody should, the big news is that it looks as if the Supreme Court is going to hear a Second Amendment case some time next year. The event that sparked this legal fuse was a case brought by six D.C. residents who simply wanted functional firearms in their homes for self-defense. In response, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down the District's 31-year-old gun ban -- one of the strictest in the nation.

Our individual right to keep and bear arms, as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, may finally be confirmed by the high court; but this means that we're going to see increasing pressure on the Supreme Court from anti-gun rights activists who want the Constitution reinterpreted to fit their prejudices. The New York Times has already fired the first broadside.

A few days ago, the Gray Lady published a fascinating account of the case -- fascinating but fundamentally flawed. In it, the central argument about the Second Amendment is pretty accurately described. Specifically, it is between those who see it as an individual right versus those who see it as a collective states' right having more to do with the National Guard than the people.

Unfortunately, the article falsely portrays the individual right argument as some new interpretation held only by a few fringe theorists. The truth is very different, as civil rights attorney and gun law expert Don Kates has pointed out recently.

From the enactment of the Bill of Rights in 1791 until the 20th Century, no one seriously argued that the Second Amendment dealt with anything but an individual right -- along with all other nine original amendments. Kates writes that not one court or commentator denied it was a right of individual gun owners until the last century. Judges and commentators in the 18th and 19th century routinely described the Second Amendment as a right of individuals. And they expressly compared it to the other rights such as speech, religion, and jury trial.

The Times has simply replayed theories invented by the 20th century gun control movement. Their painting of the individual right interpretation as a minority view is equally fanciful.

Kates writes that, "Over 120 law review articles have addressed the Second Amendment since 1980. The overwhelming majority affirm that it guarantees a right of individual gun owners. That is why the individual right view is called the 'standard model' view by supporters and opponents alike. With virtually no exceptions, the few articles to the contrary have been written by gun control advocates, mostly by people in the pay of the anti-gun lobby."

Kates goes further, writing that "a very substantial proportion" of the articles supporting individual gun rights are by scholars who would have been happy to find evidence that guns could be banned. When guns were outlawed in D.C., crime and murder rates skyrocketed. Still, the sentiment exists and must be countered with facts. All of this highlights why it is so important to appoint judges who understand that their job is to interpret the law, as enacted by will of the people, rather than make it up as they go along.

This guy certainly has his head screwed on straight. If only more people in power saw the issue like this.

Redneck Repairs · May 17th, 2007, 03:58 PM

from what i have heard and seen i kinda like thompson , but then i liked regan back when you shouldnt . I guess its wait and see right now tho as to just who will be there at the elections . Run or not , i think thompson will be a force that all will have to deal with .

SixBravo · May 17th, 2007, 04:52 PM

Senator Thompson argues once again using cold hard facts. He doesn't need emotional appeals and all that nonsense that the anti's love. That's one of the reasons I like this guy so much.

Straight-shooter.. all the way.

lostone1413 · May 19th, 2007, 09:40 PM

Seen an article on Thompson that was on www.keepandbeararms.com Seem when he was in the Senate something like 30 bills came up that would affect us gun owners. Seems he only voted in the best interest of the gun owners 19 times. He might be better then the other leaders but with that record I wouldn't call him strong Pro Gun. The only one running that is really strong Pro Gun is Ron Paul

sgtD · May 19th, 2007, 11:10 PM

Right now, Fred Thompson is my only hope of having a reason to vote in the next election. I couldn't bring myself to vote for any other candidate that is currently running.

I hope he jumps in and quits fooling around. i'm getting tired of waiting.

P95Carry · May 19th, 2007, 11:19 PM

Every time I see even a hint of logic - I am relieved! Fred may not be perfect but what he says makes some sense. So much is gut emotion and hype so any logic is refreshing for me.

Of course - priority would be Ron Paul for Prez ....... he is our staunchest ally.

ExSoldier · May 19th, 2007, 11:37 PM

Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Fred Thompson are all acceptable to me. If it's NOT one of them then I likely won't vote. For the first Presidential election cycle since 1975. I absolutely refuse to vote to cut my own throat. In fact if this immigration bill passes in it's current form with the GOP pushing it, I may well change my party affiliation from Republican to Independent.

sgtD · May 19th, 2007, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExSoldier

I likely won't vote. For the first Presidential election cycle since 1975. I absolutely refuse to vote to cut my own throat. In fact if this immigration bill passes in it's current form with the GOP pushing it, I may well change my party affiliation from Republican to Independent.

Mee too, and I have voted in every one since '88. I changed my party affiliation once before to R when Clinton was running for re-election.

SIGguy229 · May 19th, 2007, 11:54 PM

Unfortunately during the debate on Fox News, Ron Paul came off like a crackpot and Rudy shut him down...hard.

Ron Paul will not be considered a serious GOP candidate.

Sam Douthit · May 20th, 2007, 12:12 AM

I really like Thompson. My problem is that I would vote for Thompson in a heartbeat but I really wonder if he wants to be president in light of what lurks in the future. You have the likes of Carter and the rest of the Democrat cabal ragging on Bush and they will anyone who is not a socialist. Is it worth it for a man of honor to put up with the crap of being in office today? Politics is a career for most Democrats they don't care about the country as long as they are in charge and can get all the perks of office and the money from other things like the things that made the Clintons so wealthy.

May 19th, 2007, 09:40 PM	#4
lostone1413 Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Arizona Posts: 91	Seen an article on Thompson that was on www.keepandbeararms.com Seem when he was in the Senate something like 30 bills came up that would affect us gun owners. Seems he only voted in the best interest of the gun owners 19 times. He might be better then the other leaders but with that record I wouldn't call him strong Pro Gun. The only one running that is really strong Pro Gun is Ron Paul __________________ Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom. — John F. Kennedy

May 19th, 2007, 11:10 PM	#5
sgtD Distinguished Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Kansas Posts: 1,685	Right now, Fred Thompson is my only hope of having a reason to vote in the next election. I couldn't bring myself to vote for any other candidate that is currently running. I hope he jumps in and quits fooling around. i'm getting tired of waiting. __________________ When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

May 19th, 2007, 11:19 PM	#6
P95Carry Assistant Administrator Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: South West PA Posts: 25,366	Every time I see even a hint of logic - I am relieved! Fred may not be perfect but what he says makes some sense. So much is gut emotion and hype so any logic is refreshing for me. Of course - priority would be Ron Paul for Prez ....... he is our staunchest ally. __________________ Chris - P95 NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member. "To own a gun and assume that you are armed is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!." If a BG dies as the result of pointing a gun at me, then he has merely succumbed to an occupational hazard of being a thug

May 19th, 2007, 11:37 PM	#7
ExSoldier VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Coral Gables, FL Posts: 4,209	Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Fred Thompson are all acceptable to me. If it's NOT one of them then I likely won't vote. For the first Presidential election cycle since 1975. I absolutely refuse to vote to cut my own throat. In fact if this immigration bill passes in it's current form with the GOP pushing it, I may well change my party affiliation from Republican to Independent. __________________ Former Infantry Captain; 20 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

May 20th, 2007, 12:12 AM	#10
Sam Douthit Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Bowdon, GA Posts: 181	I really like Thompson. My problem is that I would vote for Thompson in a heartbeat but I really wonder if he wants to be president in light of what lurks in the future. You have the likes of Carter and the rest of the Democrat cabal ragging on Bush and they will anyone who is not a socialist. Is it worth it for a man of honor to put up with the crap of being in office today? Politics is a career for most Democrats they don't care about the country as long as they are in charge and can get all the perks of office and the money from other things like the things that made the Clintons so wealthy. __________________ Sambo74 SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM

May 17th, 2007, 03:58 PM	#2
Redneck Repairs VIP Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 5,141	from what i have heard and seen i kinda like thompson , but then i liked regan back when you shouldnt . I guess its wait and see right now tho as to just who will be there at the elections . Run or not , i think thompson will be a force that all will have to deal with .

May 19th, 2007, 11:54 PM	#9
SIGguy229 VIP Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Virginia Posts: 2,004	Unfortunately during the debate on Fox News, Ron Paul came off like a crackpot and Rudy shut him down...hard. Ron Paul will not be considered a serious GOP candidate.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode