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

« Media fad issue: Florida no-retreat and felons | Main | iphone ballistic app »

Can't infringe the Second Amendment, try the First instead

Posted by David Hardy · 21 July 2014 05:55 PM

Rep. Robin Kelly (bought, or at least leased, by Mayor Bloomberg) proposes a ban on firearm advertising directly at children or their parents, such as prohibitions on brand name t-shirts and caps "marketed for children," and a ban on firearms in colors appealing to young shooters.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney calls for Capitol Hill Police to investigate Larry Pratt of GOA, since he dared to say that the Second Amendment is aimed at preventing tyrannical government. ( here's Larry's reply).

I guess if they can't get at the Second Amendment, they have to try to strike at the First.

· antigun groups

2 Comments | Leave a comment

fwb | July 22, 2014 12:35 PM | Reply

Those who ignore history are just plain s2pid. As I have made note before, the Framers of the Constitution did not want a Bill of Rights because the federal government had NO AUTHORITY to legislate in the areas the Bill would cover. The Framers also feared, rightly so, that the idiots would think the inclusion of the BoR was to stop the feds from ding things when in fact the BoR is simply a listing of Rights that NO GOVERNMENT should violate. It was said that including the BoR would result in the government thinking it had the power to legislate and lo and behold that's what the F happened. The federal government was granted no police powers outside the 6 or so grants. Tha fact that some police powers had to be granted proves without a doubt that other police powers do not exist at the federal level and the location of the granted police powers proves that the N&P clause DOES NOT IMPLY any police powers for the federal government. No on can supply any logic to prove my statement wrong. If the N&P implied police powers for commerce or taxation then why did the Framers explicitly include the police power over counterfeiting? Was counterfeiting more important than commerce? No, the Framers granted extremely limited police power to the fed and those powers are explicit. There are no implied police powers and the feds have no authority to legislate in any of the areas covered by the Bill of Rights. I've been told the Rights are no absolute, usually by a lawyer. Well they are just simply wrong. God endowed Rights are absolute and governments have no authority to legislate them away or limit them in any way.

These s2pid congresscritters need to read US v Cruikshank. They might learn that even repealing the second won't take the Right away because the 2nd doesn't grant crap.

DaveP. | July 23, 2014 7:38 AM | Reply

"Children AND their parents"? So Swingin' Singles are okay?

Leave a comment