The Federalist:
In a recent interview with The New York Times regarding his upcoming memoir, former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens shares what he contends are the three worst court decisions to come down during his long tenure. His first choice, unsurprisingly, is District of Columbia v. Heller, the 2008 ruling that finally codified the Second Amendment as an individual right.
Stevens told the Times that he even took “an extraordinary step in trying to head off the decision,” preemptively sending the other justices a probable dissent to convince them to change their positions. “The combination of its actual practical impact by increasing the use of guns in the country and also the legal reasoning, which I thought was totally unpersuasive,” he says, “persuaded me that the case is just about as bad as any in my tenure.”
Stevens doesn’t even attempt to hide the political motivation behind his argument. Earlier this year, in fact, Stevens implored Americans to do what he couldn’t while on the court, and repeal the Second Amendment. Stevens quotes former Chief Justice Burger, who in 1991 claimed that activists had perpetrated “one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”
Both these justices rely on an expedient revisionist history to make their claims. This effort was spearheaded by left-wing historians who attempted to retroactively dismiss the ubiquitous presence of guns in American life and the role firearms played in the rise of a nation. It was taken up by anti-firearm activists and journalists who have used that revisionist history to dismiss the overwhelming evidence that the founding generation believed individual Americans had an inherent right to bear those arms.
All of these forces fostered a “collective right” theory regarding the Second Amendment that was normalized in legal and political circles for decades. Countless judges, like Stevens, latched onto this mythology in an attempt to disarm law-abiding individuals in the name of safety. more here
Who the fuck cares what the Supreme Court or any other corrupt man made organization would say.
Liberty, self protection, preservation and determination, are God given.
…sure would be nice if that memoir were published posthumously, just sayin’…
I’m not sure he has actually said this, but if he hasn’t, he will soon.
https://twitter.com/Qdude6/status/1161043907259568128
…maybe he should read that “Boston” piece that was put up by @Claudia here earlier. Might refresh his memory about how this Country was FOUNDED with guns, since he and Ruth Buzzi were both here, but probably on the British side…
https://iotwreport.com/breaking-seventy-two-killed-resisting-gun-confiscation/
“…District of Columbia v. Heller, the 2008 ruling that finally codified the Second Amendment as an individual right.”
The first 10 Amendments of the Constitution are known as “The Bill of Rights.” Perhaps some learned judge can explain why a court case was ever needed to codify that as an individual right. Is the Constitution vague on the subject of group rights vs. individual rights, or something?
Any country that needs judges to interpret founding documents that define rights is screwed from the outset.
he makes a well-reasoned argument, but slips up w/ saying ‘despite our many political battles, there is no need for armed insurrection today.’
… not really sure he’s reading the latest tea leaves … when, exactly, do we start welding the pitchforks? … it’s getting a bit late, n’est pas?
Even these jackass Justices erroneously think (or are trying to create the mindset that) the 2nd amendment creates / grants a right to be armed. It doesn’t. It is a legal restriction on the government from interfering with (infringing on) the natural God given right of the individual to be armed for protection.
I’ve always believed that is an important distinction to keep straight. Once people think the government creates rights, then they’ll also think the government also has the right to take them away. (government granting rights is what is done in other countries, not here) Do away with the second amendment, the right of the individual to be armed will still exist. But it will become a lot more difficult to exercise it.
I heard RBG tried to swing that very same vote under President Lincoln!
The words “well regulated militia” was meant to describe an appropriately and adequately armed citizenry. It was the common language of that time.
I just bought a rifle capable of killing a bull elephant. I’m never going to kill a bull elephant, but it’s nice to know I’ll always have enough gun no matter the circumstances, and besides, I just wanted it. It smells like freedom.
Hambone, so what did you get? If you were to line up a row of antifa guys, how many could you take out with 1 shot?
@Joe6pak
Let’s just say it’s more powerful than a .375 H&H.
@Hambone -.416 Rigby? .50 BMG? .577,.600, or dare I ask .700 Nitro Express?
(drooooooolll)
Two thoughts:
No amendment in the Bill of Rights is subject to repeal. That Stevens would suggest such displays gross ignorance or crass political objective.
The gun control act of 1968 had as a major objective the disarmament of those uppity Southern Republicans. As they were agitating for their God-given equal rights, their inexpensive, easily concealed and carried, and often imported pocket pistols made it difficult for the militant wing of the democratic party to intimidate and lynch them.
I don’t give a damn HOW good a bassist he was with Led Zeppelin; his jurisprudence SUCKED OUT LOUD!
Hambone’s comments about a “well-regulated militia” are spot on. John Adams especially didn’t like the thought of having a standing army. He, however, did see the necessity of having an armed citizenry. My own gggg grandfather was drafted out of Bedford County, where his family lived, as a Virginia militiaman at 16 years old to fight the British in the Revolution, and he participated in some intense battles. His three brothers served in that capacity as well. Revisionist history sucks. Teach your children and grandchildren well, because they’re FOR SURE being indoctrinated to hate America.
This elitist fuck needs to go eat his oatmeal, and shove his old law degree up his ass.
“District of Columbia v. Heller, the 2008 ruling that finally codified the Second Amendment as an individual right.”……..was redundant. The 2A says what it says, in perfectly plain language (if not period vernacular). I certainly didn’t need it interpreted by the likes of J.P. Stevens.
You have a constitutional right to form a militia and be as well armed as the military since the Constitution recognizes that Militias are military!