Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Michigan deer permit issues | Main | GA Senate action »

Glenn Reynolds and Brannon Denning on Parker

Posted by David Hardy · 17 January 2008 08:39 PM

Their article, "The Year of the Gun," is online here.

· Parker v. DC

1 Comment | Leave a comment

El Gato Gordo | January 19, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply

The article ends with:

As Laurence Tribe reminds us, when there is “a deep national
dissatisfaction with the way constitutional law . . . has . . . resolved a matter,”
“We the People” seek constitutional amendments.15 Four times in the past,
Article V has been used to reverse Supreme Court cases deemed deeply
flawed. Heller could occasion a fifth.

The problem with such an approach is that we already have such an Amendment. It's perfectly clear. Sure we could add "individual" before "right", but if they admit it's individual but can be infringed pretty much whenever Congress wants to do so, that would be pointless.

Many states, Nebraska for example, have added or amended RKBA provisions to their state constitutions. In Nebraska's case they have been ignored, the State Supreme Court has refused to enforce them. They haven't invalided a single law which denies and/or infringes "the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others, and for lawful common defense, hunting, recreational use, and all other lawful purposes”. The same thing could happen, probably would happen, at the Federal level.

Then what?

Leave a comment