Judge Rules That The Second Amendment Doesn’t Protect Hunting

[fubar]

This does kick over the " I stand with Sportsmen and hunter " bullshit the pols spout. Which is good.

 

[xtry51]

If 2A doesn't protect hunting (which I agree it doesn't) then I'd like to see this turn into an attempt at a complete hunting ban. See how the fudds like that.

 

[DispositionMatrix]

They picked the wrong grounds for the suit. They should have gotten atheist plaintiffs who could claim that the law is based on the Christian sabbath and thus is an example of the state recognizing one religion over the others.

That could still happen.

 

[Garys]

That could still happen.

It could, but it would require a plaintiff with standing. And more than a few dollars.

 

[StevieP]

What about bow hunting? That has NOTHING to do with guns, yet is still banned (on Sundays), right?

 

[DispositionMatrix]

If 2A doesn't protect hunting (which I agree it doesn't) then I'd like to see this turn into an attempt at a complete hunting ban. See how the fudds like that.

Meh. Once the private ownership of firearms has come to an end in the US, hunting will be limited to bows and spears.

 

[Shovelheddrew]

Writing a motion is an art not luck.

 

[Garys]

What about bow hunting? That has NOTHING to do with guns, yet is still banned (on Sundays), right?

The Second Amendment doesn't specify firearms, it specifies "arms".

 

[bigblue]

Some have already rewritten the script, and I applaud them for that, it's the only legitimate strategy for disarming the populace. But the ratification of an Amendment is the absolute last straw, if it ever goes that far.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...a19578-b8fa-11e3-96ae-f2c36d2b1245_story.html

I'm sorry but this entire essay hinges on the misunderstanding of a basic tenant of 2A: The very definition of a militia, as defined by the Congress of the United States of America.

"(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."

He can re-write the amendment as indicated but that would only serve to EXPAND gun rights not contract them. The contemporary misunderstanding of "militia" is at the root of most anti 2A arguments.

 

[hunt4riches]

Anyone that is okay with Sunday hunting bans needs their head examined.

I agree. Such a ruling opens the door to banning shooting ranges from being open on Sundays. Down hill fast from there... Some day, I'll be 90-whatever. My great grand kids will probably say something like, "wow, you mean way back then you didn't need a permit to breath?"

 

[Quiet]

I'm sorry but this entire essay hinges on the misunderstanding of a basic tenant of 2A: The very definition of a militia, as defined by the Congress of the United States of America.

"(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."

He can re-write the amendment as indicated but that would only serve to EXPAND gun rights not contract them. The contemporary misunderstanding of "militia" is at the root of most anti 2A arguments.

So since I'm over 45 I gotta turn'em in?

 

[FreeWillie]

So since I'm over 45 I gotta turn'em in?

I'm well over 45 but I am an officer of the United States Air Force on inactive status. That's right I still retain my commission. As such, I am a member of the militia regardless of age. Even if I wasn't I wouldn't give up my firearms.

 

[bigblue]

So since I'm over 45 I gotta turn'em in?

I didn't say that I agreed with it.

What I wrote was merely that Justice Stevens wrote an essay rewriting the 2A that is based on a complete misunderstanding of the term "militia". Most people have the same misunderstanding. I don't get the age range defined by congress but it's there regardless.

 

[Squire]

I'm sorry but this entire essay hinges on the misunderstanding of a basic tenant of 2A: The very definition of a militia, as defined by the Congress of the United States of America.

"(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."

He can re-write the amendment as indicated but that would only serve to EXPAND gun rights not contract them. The contemporary misunderstanding of "militia" is at the root of most anti 2A arguments.

It doesn't make me feel better that Congress defines militia, because they can change it.

Which is why Stevens suggests an amendment limiting 2A to "people serving in a militia" is the ultimate anti strategy, implying subsequent action by Congress to define militia how they please.

My point is that the vote by the States to ratify such an Amendment (should it get to that point) is essentially a vote asking each State to pick a side in the subsequent breakup of the United States, possibly followed by a civil war.

 

[cekim]

So since I'm over 45 I gotta turn'em in?

Nope, the militia clause simply provides an incentive for government to obey the law.

The law is still "shall not be infringed".

The reason for such a stringent and overarching restriction on government, beyond just your fundamental rights is that it is necessary to the security of a free state. It is a public policy statement that public safety rests on having an armed populace...

As I have said before, everything else is the king trying to wiggle out of his shackles.

2A has nothing to do with hunting. Poorly pleaded case.

 

[HuntMaine]

Anyone that is okay with Sunday hunting bans needs their head examined.

THIS


Plus 40 other states dont have an issue with it. Its a holdover from the times when most people went to church on sunday....im doubtful its the case now but antis will use the Sunday church day as an excuse as it fits their agenda. id rather have mondays banned if given the choice being I work for a living and the weekend is all I got to hunt.


Sent from the blind

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Anyone that is okay with Sunday hunting bans needs their head examined.

This 100 times