mldeerslayer:

PMoss:

 The following quote is taken from the 157 page decision:

 "Held:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a

firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for

traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

Pp. 2–53.

(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but

does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative

clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it

connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.

(b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation

2 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

Syllabus

of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically

capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists

feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in

order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing

army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress

power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear

arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved."

The reference to Militia is a "preforatory Cause". "The the right of the people to keep and bear arms" portion is the "Operative Clause".

To "bear arms" means to carry. That was true when the second was written and is still true today. One can bear arms to support a militia or to go hunting etc..

 pm

Syllabus

of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically

capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists

feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in

order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing

army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress

power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear

arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved."

The reference to Militia is a "preforatory Cause". "The the right of the people to keep and bear arms" portion is the "Operative Clause".

To "bear arms" means to carry. That was true when the second was written and is still true today. One can bear arms to support a militia or to go hunting etc..

 pm

Syllabus

of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically

capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists

feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in

order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing

army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress

power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear

arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved."

The reference to Militia is a "preforatory Cause". "The the right of the people to keep and bear arms" portion is the "Operative Clause".

To "bear arms" means to carry. That was true when the second was written and is still true today. One can bear arms to support a militia or to go hunting etc..

 pm

Syllabus

of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically

capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists

feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in

order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing

army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress

power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear

arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved."

The reference to Militia is a "preforatory Cause". "The the right of the people to keep and bear arms" portion is the "Operative Clause".

To "bear arms" means to carry. That was true when the second was written and is still true today. One can bear arms to support a militia or to go hunting etc..

 pm

v. HELLER

Syllabus

of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically

capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists

feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in

order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing

army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress

power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear

arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved."

The reference to Militia is a "preforatory Cause". "The the right of the people to keep and bear arms" portion is the "Operative Clause".

To "bear arms" means to carry. That was true when the second was written and is still true today. One can bear arms to support a militia or to go hunting etc..

 pm

 

"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. "

I'm happy with the outcome of the case, but it's a load of BS legally speaking. Strictly construing the words of the amendment, as 'Justice' Scolia and the other ultra right wingers say they want to do, leads to only one possible conclusion-- the individual right is based on the need to have a "well regulated Militia." Therefore, only guns that can be used in state militias are covered under the second amendment. That was the case law until this DC gun ban case:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment02/

Scolia and the others are doing EXACTLY what they previously complained about. They are not applying strict construction to the Constitution. They are actually ignoring the clear meaning of the second amendment and making up new law as they go. They are doing the same thing that the 1973 SCOTUS did in Roe v. Wade. In Wade, the SCOTUS made up a right of privacy for abortion that doesn't exist in the constitution. In the DC gun ban case, the SCOTUS expanded the individual right to keep and bear arms beyond ownership for use in state militias. They made the common law right to keep and bear arms for hunting and self-defense a constitutional right.

Like I said, I like the result, but let's at least admit the hypocricy of Scolia and his right wing buddies on the SCOTUS.

ML

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.

ODD how some see things 

 the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

the above means something. 

 A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, _________________________, shall not be infringed.

the above means nothing.

To strike fear in the hearts of government weasels, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

this means something also.

It is amazing how far liberal wishful think goes!