PDA

View Full Version : ADL on Heller



Submariner
01-16-08, 09:41
Commenting on a similar brief to that of the Solicitor General by the Anti-Defamation League, the following (click on link to read the brief), written by a black man, is offensive, perhaps, to many here but on point nevertheless:


from: http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/

Under the civilian disarmament ordinances of the District, Dick Anthony Heller, a police officer, was permitted to carry a firearm while on the clock as a government employee, but not to own and use a handgun or rifle for self-defense as a civilian in his own home. (Heller's specific job, incidentally, is guarding federal judges.) He challenged the District's law in court, losing the initial trial but winning in federal appeals court.

As I see it, the Heller case uniquely lays bare for inspection the often concealed premise of all civilian disarmament laws: Since the State must have a monopoly on the use of force, only agents of the State can be permitted to carry weapons. Thus only when Heller was dressed in a State-issued costume was he was permitted to pack a gun. When dressed more respectably in the clothes of a productive private citizen, Heller lost whatever magical property inheres in those who work for the tax-consuming class, and was thus forbidden to carry a firearm.

This arrangement is a nearly perfect inversion of the social order envisioned in the Second Amendment.

gyp_c2
01-17-08, 00:25
...nice catch...
It's certainly telling given the quoted nations identified as supporters of their views...
It was interesting to note the contradictory statements re: Blackstone as well...
...most certainly no friends of ours...more correctly, they'd prefer we join with those nations who've already disarmed the subjects...http://emoticons4u.com/smoking/rauch06.gif

Deadduck
01-17-08, 14:29
He's spot on. The right to bear arms was intended to protect the citizenry from a tyranical government.

Business_Casual
03-04-08, 09:42
What is it - two weeks until arguments?

M_P

Abraxas
03-04-08, 09:46
I hate to say it but, I still have a sneaking suspicion that the supreme court will sell us out

Submariner
03-04-08, 10:15
I hate to say it but, I still have a sneaking suspicion that the supreme court will sell us out

Maybe that's why Federal is dumping the M193 from Lake City.;)

mmike87
03-04-08, 10:23
No, I expect the ruling to be so narrow in focus that it's going to be insignificant. My suspicion is that after the ruling, DC will have to make some minor "tweak" to it's law, but afterwards it will still be next to impossible to legally own a firearm there.

The status quo will be maintained, for the good and the bad.

IdahoCorsair
03-05-08, 13:30
It's going to be so specific, like mmike said, that it's insignificant,
or
possibly it will appease both sides by giving the pro-gun side a token victory by saying that the 2nd A is indeed an individual right.... BUT with reeeeasonable restrictions. Thus it keeps rednecks from rioting but allows the continued march towards gun control and likely confiscation, effectively castrating the 2nd Amendment.

variablebinary
03-05-08, 14:24
It's going to be so specific, like mmike said, that it's insignificant,
or
possibly it will appease both sides by giving the pro-gun side a token victory by saying that the 2nd A is indeed an individual right.... BUT with reeeeasonable restrictions. Thus it keeps rednecks from rioting but allows the continued march towards gun control and likely confiscation, effectively castrating the 2nd Amendment.


Yep. That is how it will play out. SCOTUS is going to play this one safe, but be sure to preserve the power of Gov't...Still, its absurd considering the numerous writings from the founding fathers which clearly spell out the intent of the 2nd