So John Paul Stevens thinks that the Second Amendment to the Constitution should be repealed (among other opinions about our right to bear arms). Here is what Bill Whittle’s Right Angle team has to say.
My favorite part – by Scott Ott (who frequently annoys me):
The troubling part of this is that John Paul Stevens, who was a Supreme Court Associate Justice, somehow thinks that if you got rid of the Second Amendment, you’d get rid of peoples’ right to keep and bear arms. In other words, he thinks that it is the Constitution itself that grants that right to keep and bear arms, rather than the Constitution basically – it’s a brush-back pitch from the framers of the Bill of Rights who said – ‘Look. Don’t mess with this boys.’
Early on, when they were in the process of the ratification debates in 1787-88-89, talking about this proposed Bill of Rights – that is essentially what got the Constitution ratified was the promise of a Bill of Rights – some of the opponents of a Bill of Rights said, ‘Look. If you start enumerating rights that belong to the people, then the assumption will be that anything you don’t enumerate doesn’t exist. In addition, if you start enumerating rights, you may create an atmosphere that says, Oh this is something about which the Federal government is concerned and, therefore, we may want to consider regulating this area of life within the bounds prescribed by the Constitution itself.’
So there were some serious thinkers along the way who were saying, ‘Don’t do a Bill of Rights. You’re going to open up a can of worms that you can’t possibly anticipate. The other thing is that John Paul Stevens, a Supreme Court Justice at one point in his life, doesn’t seem to understand that the Ninth Amendment [sic. Should be Tenth, but the Ninth applies too] would still exist, which to paraphrase, says ‘Hey, anything we didn’t say here in the Constitution, any rights that we didn’t specifically enumerate here, still belong to the States and to the people, so Shut Up.’