Supreme Court 5-4 vote, if this court were actually following the Constitution that gun vote should have been nine to nothing, it should have been unanimous.
When this case was brought, a lot of people said, “What do you mean the Second Amendment might not apply to the states? How can that be?” Everybody assumed that the Bill of Rights applied to individuals everywhere.
That’s what this case was about.
It’s a Chicago gun case. The Supreme Court in this ruling not only confirmed that the Second Amendment means what it says, but it uses discrimination and abuses against blacks after the Civil War to make the point.
The justification, in part, for the ruling is that freed slaves would not be free, were they denied the right to keep and bear arms. And so there were several rulings demanding that in addition to their new found freedom they also be granted access to the Second Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment.
It’s an amazing case when you look at this, because the conservative position, in order to be free, the Constitution must be interpreted as to what it says, and it must apply to everybody.
The Second and Fourteenth Amendments prevented recently freed slaves from remaining de facto slaves forever. If they were denied, for example, recently freed slaves denied the right to keep and bear arms, they still were not totally free. That’s what this court has said today. And yet there were four justices who disagreed with this.
Everybody who cares about how free men are kept free needs to read this ruling.
Justice Thomas on pages 42 to 46 gives a really necessary history lesson that everyone should read.
He documents how blacks were almost denied their right to keep and bear arms and thus subjected to less than full citizenship and left defenseless against those that sought to continue to control them even after the days of slavery.
The US Constitution is the greatest legal document of freedom written. It puts teeth into individual and human rights.
The left has been doing everything it can to revise and to rewrite that history and to say that the Second Amendment doesn’t mean what it says, and this ruling just obliterates their logic.
The right to bear arms, the fascinating history that accompanies it and an important role in the freeing of black Americans from discrimination and de facto bondage and slavery.
Starting on page 26 of the majority opinion, the case McDonald v. Chicago, the court supports its conclusion that the right to bear arms applies to states as well as individuals.
They demonstrate how vital the Second Amendment was to recently freed slaves:
“The most explicit evidence of Congress’ aim appears in§14 of the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866, which provided that ‘the right … to have full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings concerning personal liberty, personal security, and the acquisition, enjoyment, and disposition of estate, real and personal, including the constitutional right to bear arms, shall be secured to and enjoyed by all the citizens … without respect to race or color, or previous condition of slavery.'”
In order to affirm their notion that the Second Amendment applies to everybody, not just areas of the federal government, the Bill of Rights, they cite post-slavery and the right of former slaves to have guns.
Four justices of the US Supreme Court voted as though the Second Amendment didn’t exist or as though they thought the Second Amendment was wrong or they think.
Section 14 of this ruling thus explicitly guaranteed that all citizens, black and white, would have the constitutional right to bear arms. So I guess we could say constitutional decision here, conservative court, 5-4 has used the illegal discrimination against blacks as proof of the value and intent the Second Amendment.
The liberals, if they weren’t hypocrites, ought to be cheering this reasoning and this decision. Disarming blacks post-slavery was key to preventing them from ever becoming free. The attempt was made even after slavery was declared illegal and it was ended, after the civil war they still tried to keep blacks from getting guns. And everybody back then knew, you’re not going to really be free, and you’re really not going to be an American if you’re denied the right to keep and bear arms simply because of your race.
What liberal can argue with this?
“In debating the Fourteenth Amendment, the 39th Congress referred to the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental right deserving of protection.Senator Samuel Pomeroy described three ‘indispensable’ ‘safeguards of liberty under our form of Government.’ 39th Cong. Globe 1182. One of these, he said, was the right to keep and bear arms: ‘Every man . . . should have the right to bear arms for the defense of himself and family and his homestead. And if the cabin door of the freedman is broken open –If the cabin door of the freedman is broken open and the intruder enters for purposes as vile as were known to slavery, then should a well-loaded musket be in the hand of the occupant to send the polluted wretch to another world, where his wretchedness will forever remain complete.”
“Evidence from the period immediately following the Amendment’s ratification confirms that that right was considered fundamental. In an 1868 speech addressing the disarmament of freedmen Representative Stevens emphasized the necessity of the right: ‘Disarm a community and you rob them of the means of defending life. Take away their weapons of defense and you take away the inalienable right of defending liberty.’
‘The fourteenth amendment, now so happily adopted, settles the whole question.” And in debating the Civil Rights Act of 1871, Congress routinely referred to the right to keep and bear arms and decried the continued disarmament of blacks in the South.”
The only downside is that there were four Supreme Court justices that voted against this — voted against the Second Amendment.
If the Constitution mattered to the left and these four justices on the left may as well epitomize the rest of the left in this country and around the world. If they had their way, it wouldn’t be 5-4. That’s how close we are to the forfeiture of our freedom.
Supreme Court justices vote on the Constitution. They determine whether something is constitutional or not. The Second Amendment got voted on today, and it squeaked by 5-4.
They don’t just want to amend it. They don’t want to go to the trouble of amending it. The short-circuit way is to get enough of Obama’s people on the court and throughout the federal judiciary so they can simply repeal it by fiat, by virtue of their rulings.
Imagine if it was the First Amendment, free speech that was voted on today and it passed 5-4. It’s inconceivable…