LogFAQs > #945665358

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, Database 7 ( 07.18.2020-02.18.2021 ), DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Feds stop a militia plot to overthrow the government of Michigan.
CyborgSage00x0 10/09/20 6:05:40 PM #77:	TheWorstPoster posted... A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/text-41-50#s-lg-box-wrapper-25493411 Which is cool and all, but again, until just 12 years ago, this was ALWAYS read in the context of being in a Militia. Historical analysis of how it is written, as well as the explanation of the amendment at the time, tell us as much. Which is why it was read that way for 200+ years. It's pretty obvious at this point that the contentious 5-4 Heller ruling of 2008 was the work of conservative activists judges, most notably Scalia, who completely jettisoned his "originalist" interpretation for a reading that is quite of opposite. It's why Heller is cited as one of the most likely rulings to be overturned eventually. Also, you should probably re-read that Federalist paper: it very clearly talks about arms in the context of the militia, military, and armed conflicts. Furthermore, while the Federalist Papers are helpful insights into what eventually formed the Constitution, they are themselves not the Constitution. --- PotD's resident Film Expert. <cite>CyborgSage00x0 posted [p:945665358] in Feds stop ... [t:79027774]...</cite> <quote>TheWorstPoster posted... </cite> <quote>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/text-41-50#s-lg-box-wrapper-25493411</quote>Which is cool and all, but again, until just 12 years ago, this was ALWAYS read in the context of being in a Militia. Historical analysis of how it is written, as well as the explanation of the amendment at the time, tell us as much. Which is why it was read that way for 200+ years. It's pretty obvious at this point that the contentious 5-4 Heller ruling of 2008 was the work of conservative activists judges, most notably Scalia, who completely jettisoned his "originalist" interpretation for a reading that is quite of opposite. It's why Heller is cited as one of the most likely rulings to be overturned eventually. Also, you should probably re-read that Federalist paper: it very clearly talks about arms in the context of the militia, military, and armed conflicts. Furthermore, while the Federalist Papers are helpful insights into what eventually formed the Constitution, they are themselves not the Constitution. --- PotD's resident Film Expert. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1