HOW THEY WILL TAKE YOUR GUNS. Here is some dictum from a case I thought to be blatant in showing people that 2nd Amendment rights are not what they think they are. Folks, this is your deceptive RECONSTRUCTION GOVERNMENT in action... NORDYKE v. KING D.C. No., CV-99-04389-MJJ The Second Amendment reads: “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.” U.S. Const. amend. II. The prefatory clause of this Amendment describes the right it protects. The Supreme Court has explained that the phrase necessary to the “security of a free State,” means necessary to the “security of a free polity.” 10 See Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2800 (internal quotation marks omitted). Thus the text of the Second Amendment already suggests that the right it protects relates to an institution, the militia, which is “necessary to an Anglo-American regime of ordered liberty.” Duncan, 391 U.S. at 149 n.14. The parallel is striking, particularly because the militia historically comprised all able-bodied male citizens. Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2799. This necessary “right of the people” existed before the Second Amendment as “one of the fundamental rights of Englishmen.” Id. at 2797-98. Heller identified several reasons why the militia was considered “necessary to the security of a free state.” First, “it is useful in repelling invasions and suppressing insurrections. Second, it renders large standing armies unnecessary . . . . Third, when the able-bodied men of a nation are trained in arms and organized, they are better able to resist tyranny.” Id. at 2800-01. In addition to these civic purposes, Heller characterized the right to keep and bear arms as a corollary to the individual right of self-defense. Id. at 2817 (“[T]he inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right.”). Thus the right contains both a political component—it is a means to protect the public from tyranny—and a personal component—it is a means to protect the individual from threats to life or limb. Cf. Amar, supra, at 46-59, 257-66. We must trace this right, as thus described, through our history from the Founding until the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment. //END QUOTE// Those WERE the rights of Americans... UNTIL THE ENACTMENT OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. There is no Second Amendment. There is no Tenth Amendment. You have constitutional liberties within the dictates of the 14th Amendment. Not constitutionally protected rights. Anyone that tells you that you have 2nd Amendment rights or that the 10th Amendment still exists is lying to you. The RED Amendment (14th) changed the way things operate. Moreover, People are going to be held for treason against the United States this time around if they get involved in rebellion against the system. ...
Posted on: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:47:27 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015