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 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Just released a new book | Main | 5th Circuit upholds Texas campus carry law »

Court rules against Washington gun control initiative

Posted by David Hardy · 17 August 2018 01:40 PM

Dave Workman has the story.

1 Comment | Leave a comment

FWB | August 17, 2018 3:10 PM | Reply

Broken record:

As I've noted in hundreds of posts all over the net, we can thank the idiots on the courts for these problems at the state level. In 1833, Chief Justice John Marshall and the SC ruled that not one iota of the Bill of Rights bound the States. The case was Baron v Baltimore. Marshall and the Court were wrong and that wrong gave us 20,000+ state level laws that clearly violate the 2nd amendment. Regardless of Madison's intent or desires, he was repudiated by the placement of the Bill of Rights at the end of the Constitution. While some, the 1st and probably the 3rd, are clearly aimed at the feds, the others are general. Once ratified the amendment became an integral part of the Constitution and were covered by the SUPREMACY Clause. The 2nd, 4th, 5th, and other clearly cover all governmental entities, federal, state, and local. Not a single word in any of them gives the slightest hint of limiting any amendment solely to the federal government.

Even then the courts have lied and used the necessary and proper clause to expand federal powers. The use of the words "necessary and proper" in Article I, Section 8 are restrictive and not expansive. Those who treat N&P as expansive do not grasp English grammar. If the N&P are expansive words then half the granted powers are unnecessary and the Framers were simply ignorant in spending so much time explicitly stating those powers. No interpretation/reading of one clause in the Constitution is valid if that reading negate the need for another clause or clauses. If the N&P is expansive then the grant to "provide for the common Defense" carries with it the power to raise and support armies, to provide and maintain a navy, to declare war, to organize, arm, and discipline the militia, etc. Thus those grants are superfluous and a waste of space and ink.

Leave a comment