Not to rain on anybody’s parade, but…
[Via Jess]
Notes from the Resistance
Former Justice Breyer rips conservative Supreme Court for giving nation ‘Constitution no one wants’ – Breyer said originalism will ‘overlook lots of changes designed to further the value of protecting basic civil rights, because the world has changed’ [More]
Yeah, the guy who dissented in Heller and said the RKBA shall be infringed wants the Constitution to say whatever he and his fellow authoritarians want it to say, because they’re smarter than the Founders and they’re smarter than you.
Everybody wants that.
No…?
Dave, like so many others you are in error concerning Heller’s statement on the M-16. Scalia wrote that anyone who say’s M-16s and the like can be banned have de facto separated and nullified the prefatory clause “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state,” from the operative “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
“It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful
in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be
banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely
detached from the prefatory clause.” [More]
He’s leaving out the big “but” that immediately follows:
But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty.
Previously qualified as:
We therefore read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns. That accords with the historical understanding of the scope of the right…
I’ve posted this here because if I’m to get my other work done, I don’t have time to get embroiled in comments on AmmoLand, and besides, I get my say in the article and comments are for the readers.
And point of order…