Wednesday, March 28, 2018

Former Supreme Court Justice calls for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment. Now we're talking. Update!

Courtesy of the New York Times:  

For over 200 years after the adoption of the Second Amendment, it was uniformly understood as not placing any limit on either federal or state authority to enact gun control legislation. In 1939 the Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress could prohibit the possession of a sawed-off shotgun because that weapon had no reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a “well regulated militia.” 

During the years when Warren Burger was our chief justice, from 1969 to 1986, no judge, federal or state, as far as I am aware, expressed any doubt as to the limited coverage of that amendment. When organizations like the National Rifle Association disagreed with that position and began their campaign claiming that federal regulation of firearms curtailed Second Amendment rights, Chief Justice Burger publicly characterized the N.R.A. as perpetrating “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.”

In 2008, the Supreme Court overturned Chief Justice Burger’s and others’ long-settled understanding of the Second Amendment’s limited reach by ruling, in District of Columbia v. Heller, that there was an individual right to bear arms. I was among the four dissenters. That decision — which I remain convinced was wrong and certainly was debatable — has provided the N.R.A. with a propaganda weapon of immense power. Overturning that decision via a constitutional amendment to get rid of the Second Amendment would be simple and would do more to weaken the N.R.A.’s ability to stymie legislative debate and block constructive gun control legislation than any other available option. 

That simple but dramatic action would move Saturday’s marchers closer to their objective than any other possible reform. It would eliminate the only legal rule that protects sellers of firearms in the United States — unlike every other market in the world. It would make our schoolchildren safer than they have been since 2008 and honor the memories of the many, indeed far too many, victims of recent gun violence.

Before anybody starts freaking out about liberal judges, it should be noted that former Justice John Paul Stevens is a Republican.

And he is right, the 2nd Amendment, as it is currently written, does not make any sense in the 21st Century.

If the Ammosexuals truly think that their cache of pea shooters would slow down the government if it actually turned on the people, they need to step away from the Meth and reevaluate that facts.

Even the military style weapons that these Rambo wannabes keep masturbating over would only piss off the soldiers in their armored vehicles and missile equipped helicopters.

Which means that they, their home/fortress, and cache of assault style weapons would likely be blown up in a rather spectacular fashion after they fired their first shot.

No, the simple fact is that we have FAR too many guns, FAR too many gun nuts, and FAR too few lawmakers willing to defy the NRA.

Update: Well this op-ed certainly caught somebody's attention.
And that somebody sounds a little panicky. 

22 comments:

  1. Anonymous4:50 AM

    Pretty cool for him to speak out about this, especially considering he was on the Supreme Court. I think he’ll get blasted on nearly every side with this, because he is suggesting far more serious action publicly than anyone will at this point. I’m glad he’s firmly sharing his position.

    That said, I’m a little worried for the guy. We all know how crazy the internet trolls get. It’s inevitable that he’ll get death threats. I hope he’ll be okay.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous6:36 AM

      #repealthesecond #repealtrump

      Delete
  2. Anonymous5:34 AM

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/02/second-amendment-ratified-preserve-slavery/
    Slavery and Apartheid require a police state. We are reaping the whirlwind from this unjust law.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous3:53 PM

      up500%
      "(CNN)In the days and weeks following the February 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, the National Rifle Association saw a significant spike in donations.

      In fact, reports from the Federal Election Commission show donations to the NRA's Political Victory Fund tripled from January to February.
      In January, the NRA collected almost $248,000 in individual contributions. In February, they collected more than $779,000.
      It's no secret that interest in guns and gun sales -- as evidenced by anecdotes and manufacturing numbers -- have until recently gotten boosts from mass shootings. So it would stand to reason that donations to the NRA would get a bump as well.
      Since the Parkland shooting happened in the middle of the month, one could argue the relationship between it and the spike in donations is hard to prove.
      However, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks political spending, tracked itemized contributions (donations of $200 or more by an individual) in the days before and after the shooting. According to their data, in the two weeks after the shooting, itemized contributions to the NRA doubled from the previous two weeks.
      They also found the number of people contributing in the seven days after the shooting increased almost 500% from the week before.
      The Center for Responsive Politics says it's unclear what caused the spike, whether it was NRA outreach or President Trump's comments after the shooting suggesting he might support tougher regulations on guns.
      The NRA's Political Victory Fund contributes money to political campaigns for gun rights-friendly candidates and is only one of the ways the organization receives and spends money.
      According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the NRA spent $50.2 million on seven key races during the 2016 cycle. The group backed six Republican Senate candidates and, of course, the winning presidential campaign of Donald Trump."

      Delete
  3. Anonymous6:45 AM

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/major-trump-breitbart-donor-robert-mercer-became-volunteer-cop-carry-concealed-weapon-anywhere-everywhere/

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-03-28/robert-mercer-s-secret-adventure-as-a-new-mexico-cop

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous7:04 AM

    Repeal T-his tOO>

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

    https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/3/28/17152804/climate-change-federal-court-chevron

    ' An Inconvenient TRUTH' tell...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous7:20 AM

    Little donnie is p.o.'d that a "bunch of students" drew a bigger crowd for their march than his inauguration.

    And that do nothing porn star so called first lady who is suppose to be working on cyberbullying had no response to several tweets from students that are being defamed and threatened by the right wing.

    If don the con says the 2nd amendment will never be repealed, we have a good chance of doing it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous8:56 AM

      Plese, keep you FLOTUS porn straight. Daniels is the PORN STAR, Melania is the POR MODEL. Ivanka is the Daughter of Donnie's Desire

      Delete
    2. Anonymous3:51 PM

      oops you are right, I don't think melanomia can act anyway.

      Also she had put out a statement to take into consideration a minor is involved.
      I haven't seen anything about Barron mentioned other than he was just born when donnie couldn't help himself and that woman made him have a one night stand :)

      On the other hand I am sure his classmates have googled Mommy and found her "modeling " photos in which she has nothing on to model. A little hypocritical if you ask me.

      Delete
  6. Anonymous7:41 AM

    "mal·CON·tent
    a person who is dissatisfied and rebellious

    "Kelly compares veterans who protested over the weekend at the March For Our Lives with veterans who hit their wives"

    https://thefederalist.com/2018/03/28/stop-using-status-veteran-trash-second-amendment/

    "“Veterans are not sacred,”“Every vet takes an oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States.’ That oath doesn’t expire when you leave the service. It doesn’t mean you have to carry a weapon on foreign soil fighting our enemies forever, but at least don’t return home and put the Constitution you swore to uphold through the paper shredder.”" <WTF?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous7:55 AM

    OT? #standupJoe
    “I shouldn’t have said what I said. I shouldn’t have brought it up again, because I don’t want to get down in the mosh pit with this guy,”
    "Biden has continued to lead the “It’s On Us” campaign against sexual assault on college campuses, which began while he was in office. He insisted in his “Pod Save America” interview that the notion that he truly wanted to fight Trump was inaccurate and that his remarks had always been made with the conceit that the two septuagenarians were in high school together.

    The former vice president said Trump’s comments contribute to a culture that is permissive of violence against women."

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/28/trump-fight-biden-regret-489669

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was a reckless thing to say, obviously open to twisting to be used against Biden.

      This is why Biden should not run in 2020.

      He's a nice guy and all that. But he doesn't have what it takes to win against the current corrupt Republicans.

      Delete
  8. Anonymous8:27 AM

    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/3/23/1748957/-Why-Biden-s-own-locker-room-talk-does-more-harm-than-good

    " don’t believe the idea that sexual assault was less prevalent during Biden and Trump’s adolescence. Rates of rAPE have been declining for decades. We’re hearing more victim stories—not because of sexual violence, but because we’re increasingly creating a world where survivors’ words, the most powerful tool against rAPE culture, can be heard. " $hiTgibbon$

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous9:25 AM

    Old dotard standing there with gun in hand saying repeal will never happen. Donnie is too unstable to hold a gun and his lazy ass kids wont be killing animals for trophy very soon. Prison does not allow it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous9:27 AM

    Does don know justice stevens is a republican? Even decent republicans want to repeal and stop NRA from their crimes.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous9:35 AM

    Not panicky at all. The 2nd is here to stay.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:09 AM

      Then why all the "they want to take away our guns" hysteria? Frightened little shits aren't they. During Obama's term it was a constant shrill chorus. The gun manufacturer's surrogates(like the NRA) herd these gullible non thinkers to and fro. Ammosexuals are idiots. Gun manufacturers and Trump love them.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous2:40 PM

      Because everyone knows that in the end, the Democrats, certainly the 'progressive' lefties would attempt to take away the rights of citizens to own firearms, that is really the end goal. Gryphen would be on board with that no doubt. So that is why an inch is never given, because it would become a mile, and then another mile.

      Delete
  12. Forget about the 2nd for a minute. You're being distracted by the real danger:

    "We need more Republicans in 2018 and must ALWAYS hold the Supreme Court!"

    With Gorsucks they've got a majority with an occasional swing but mostly a majority.

    If Kennedy or Ginsburg step down or die under Trump (or Pence), the Supreme Court will be 6-3 Republican for DECADES. Then you can kiss Rowe v Wade goodbye.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous6:06 PM

    10:14 -
    "Because everyone knows that in the end, the Democrats, certainly the 'progressive' lefties would attempt to take away the rights of citizens to own firearms, that is really the end goal"

    Wow! " ... everybody knows". what a crock of BS. What propagandist is feeding you this nonsense. Damn, you're gullible. Typical.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous7:08 PM

      Sorry mialuppa, meant for 2:40PM. Oops.

      Delete
  14. Great idea! Let's get rid of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.............

    Why do people need rights? Why do people need freedom of expression? Why do they need freedom from religious oppression? Who needs the right to a fair trial? The government knows whats best for you all.

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.