Re: Help!!!! Im doing a debate on gun control and need info.

More | Report Post

On 5/16/01, Amanda wrote:
> Please help me i am debating on the pro gun control side
and
> need HELP finding info thanx.

________________________

Since the Second Amendment right "to keep and bear
arms"
applies only to the right of the State to maintain a
militia and
not to the individual's right to bear arms, there can be
no
serious claim to any express constitutional right of an
individual to possess a firearm. . .

--United States v. Warin, 530 F.2d 103.
________________________

An examination of the way other states have
construed their
constitutional right to bear arms statutes further
supports the
belief that no fundamental right to possess an assault
weapon
exists.

--Robertson v. City & County of Denver, 874 P.2d 325.
________________________

The [Second] amendment is a limitation only upon
the power
of Congress, and not upon that of the States.

--Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252
________________________

It is abundantly clear both from the discussions of
this
amendment contemporaneous with its proposal and those of
learned
writers since that this amendment, unlike those
providing for
free speech and freedom of religion, was not adopted with
individual rights in mind, but as a protection for the
States in
the maintenance of their militia organizations against
possible
encroachments by the federal power.

--Tot v. United States, 131 F. 261
________________________

Under the controlling authority of Miller we
conclude that
the right to keep and bear handguns is not guaranteed by
the
second amendment.

--Quilici v. Morton Grove, 695 F.2d 261
________________________

To apply the amendment so as to guarantee Oakes'
right to
keep an unregistered firearm which has not been shown to
have any
connection to the militia, merely because he is
technically a
member of the Kansas militia, would be unjustifiable in
terms of
either logic or policy.

--United States v. Oakes, 564 F.2d 384.
________________________

[I]t is well settled that the restrictions of these
amendments operate only upon the Federal power, and have
no
reference whatever to proceedings in state courts.

--Miller v. Texas, 153 U.S. 535.
________________________

It must be remembered that the right to keep and
bear arms
is not a right given by the United States Constitution.

-- Eckert v. City of Philadelphia, 477 F.2d 610
________________________

A fundamental right to keep and bear arms has not
been the
law for 100 years...Cases have analyzed the second
amendment
purely in terms of protecting state militias rather than
individual rights.

--United States v. Nelsen, 859 F.2d 1318
________________________

The courts have consistently held that the second
amendment
only confers a collective right of keeping and bearing
arms which
must bear "a reasonable relationship to a well-regulated
militia."

--U.S. v. Johnson, 497 F.2d 548
________________________

In short, the Second Amendment does not imply any
general
constitutional right for individuals to bear arms and
form
private armies.

--Vietnamese Fishermen's Association v. Knights of the
Ku Klu
Klan, 543 F. Supp. 198
________________________

It is not sufficient to prove that the *weapon* in
question
was susceptible to military use. It is evident that
Hale's
weapons were of a military nature and possessed the
capability of
killing and maiming groups of persons. Rather, the
claimant of
Second Amendment protection must prove that his or her
*possession* of the weapon was reasonably related to a
well
regulated militia.

--United States v. Wilbur Hale, 978 F.2d 1016.
________________________

An individual has no private right to keep and bear
arms
under the Second Amendment.

--United States v. Pencak, 872 F. Supp. 410
________________________

The right to keep and bear arms for the common
defence does
not include the right to associate together as a military
organization, or to drill and parade with arms in cities
and
towns, unless authorized to do so by law.

--Commonwealth v. Murphy, 166 Mass. 171, 44 N.E. 138
________________________

The Supreme Court of the United States has held
that the
Second Amendment was not adopted to guarantee the right
of the
individual to bear arms, but rather to protect the
states in the
maintenance of their militia organizations against
possible
encroachments by federal power.

--Eckert v. State of Pennsylvania, 331 F. Supp. 361
________________________

The National Guard is the modern Militia reserved
to the
States by Art I, Sec 8, cl 15, 16, of the Constitution.

--Maryland v. United States, 381 U.S. 41
________________________

The right of the people to keep and bear arms for
their
security is preserved, and the manner of bearing them
for such
purpose is clearly indicated to be as a member of a
well-regulated militia, or some other military
organization
provided for by law.

--Blaksley v. City of Salina, 72 Kan. Rpt. 230
________________________

With obvious purpose to assure the continuation and
render
possible the effectiveness of such [militia] forces the
declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were
made. It
must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.

--United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174.
________________________

The question has been faced by several states.
State
constitutions which provide to the 'people' the right to
keep and
bear arms for the common defence do not necessarily grant
individuals that same right. The right is not directed
to
guaranteeing individual ownership or possession of
weapons.

--Rabbit v. Leonard, 413 A. 2d 489
________________________

These legislative restrictions [the Omnibus Crime
Control
Act] on the use of firearms are neither based upon
constitutionally suspect criteria, nor do they trench
upon any
constitutionally protected liberties. See United States
v.
Miller, 307 U.S. 174, 178 (1939) (the Second Amendment
guarantees
no right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have
"some
reasonable relationship to the preservation or
efficiency of a
well regulated militia").

--Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55
________________________

There is nothing in the language of our state
constitution
or in the history of the right to "bear arms", as
protected by
the federal and various state constitutions, which lends
any
credence whatsoever to the claim that there is a
constitutional
right to carry a firearm into a drinking establishment.

--Second Amendment Foundation v. City of Renton, 668
P.2d 596
________________________

Most students of the subject would undoubtedly express
agreement with the substance of the currently expressed
view that
"the term 'well-regulated militia' must be taken to mean
the
active, organized militia of each state, which today is
characterized as the state National Guard."

--Burton v. Sills, 248 A. 2d 521
________________________

These decisions signify, and history supports the
position,
that the amendment was drafted not with the primary
purpose of
guaranteeing the rights of individuals to keep and bear
arms but,
rather, to allow Americans to possess arms to ensure the
preservation of a militia.

--Arnold v. City of Cleveland, 67 Ohio St. 3d 35
________________________

Even as against the United States, furthermore, the
Second
Amendment protects not an individual right but a
collective
right, in the people as a group, to serve as a militia.

--In Re Application of Atkinson, 291 N.W.2d 396
________________________

This court is unaware of a single case which has
upheld a
right to bear arms under the Second Amendment to the
Constitution, outside of the context of a militia.

--Thompson v. Dereta, 549 F. Supp. 297
________________________

Re: Help!!!! Im doing a debate on gun control and need info., 12/23/03, by dan dougherty.

Second Amendment Chatboard

LATEST POSTS | BY TOPICS | SUBMIT A POST