|
Alumbrado -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/28/2008 2:03:20 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MmeGigs
I never said that the law of the land was overturned. The 2nd Amendment is the law of the land. Up until 2 days ago, the 2nd Amendment was interpreted by SCOTUS as granting a collective right, not an individual right. I am not wrong in saying that - it is a fact. When I posted to the other thread that this was not an individual right, that was the interpretation that we were operating under. The 2nd Amendment is still the law of the land, but it's interpreted differently now.
Then I suspect we are talking past each other... The USSC has not addressed the 2nd amendment directly in a long time, not even in Miller, leaving a void as to exactly what the 2nd did or didn't allow with certain well known exceptions, like felons,and federal regulation of machine guns, etc.
In my book that void means that there was no 'law of the land' i.e. codified/ruling that 'the people' meant 'the government of each state'. And from the comments made in the few cases that existed, there was nothing suggesting that there was no individual right under 'the people', in fact quite the opposite..
http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndsup.html
There were talking points from pro and anti gun advocates who claimed it meant certain things, but not what is commonly referred to as the law of the land.
What the USSC did in the recent ruling was to address some of the most common talking points, and state that they were false...had always been false...very specifically, that it had always been false to assume that 'the people' only conferred the right to bear arms to the states.
quote:
The Supreme Court ruling does not create new problems for law enforcement.
I hope you're right, but I don't know that and neither do you. We'll have to wait and see.
It doesn't create new problems in the same sense that Miranda, Mapp, or Mendenhall, or dashboard cameras etc. didn't create new problems.
I didn't say people wouldn't bitch about it...[:D]
|
|
|
|
