So John Paul Stevens thinks that the Second Amendment to the Constitution should be repealed (among other opinions about our right to bear arms).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.’
Stella's Place 
Don’t our rights as a free people come from God, and NOT the government, so how can the government take our rights away?
LikeLike
Watch it. They make that point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Would Stevens prefer this…
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNION OF SOCIALIST SOVIET REPUBLICS January 1924 (abridged)
Click to access Const-USSR-1924%28abridge%29.pdf
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yup, everyone has a Constitution or something close to it but where the State has the guns that renders the provisions in it useless. Note Chaptert 2, Article 4: then look at how many republics tried to withdraw peacefully over the life of the USSR and were stopped by armed force.
LikeLike
The 2nd Amendment is about the right to defend ourselves, others, and property.
The “March for our Lives” people are actually saying, “Please make us defenseless!”
Brilliant. /s
LikeLike
A spontaneous demonstration by interested parties….sure…. https://www.google.com/search?q=hong+kong+march+us+gun+ownership&rlz=1CAACAR_enUS765US765&oq=hong+kong+march+us+gun+ownership&aqs=chrome..69i57.18720j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Funny how China’s so against US gun ownership while making millions by selling Norinco AK-47s, .45 ACPs, M-14s and other civilian and military-pattern weapons here. That’s not mentioning the illegal fully-automatic weapons they’ve been caught trying to smuggle into the US to arm their drug smuggling/selling buds here.
LikeLike
BTW, how would they deal with the individusal states’ constitutions that guarantee residents the right to gun ownership and those states who’ve put in laws further protecting their citizens’ rights to gun ownership, bolstering their states’ constitutions’ guarantees.
I know what you’re going to say…
LikeLiked by 1 person
If the 2nd amendment repealed, the 9th and 10th amendments take over. Repealing the 2nd doesn’t remove our right to bear arms. That right is now controlled by the states.
LikeLike
That’s going to be an interesting fight. For decades the DCers have been saying the 10th Amendment was crushed by the Civil War, that proved the Federal interests overrode the stare’s.
I’m afraid this will be settled in the Supreme Court and their political bent will determine if we get to keep our guns or the Feds get ’em all.
LikeLike
Oh, forgot – some states passedf laws that said guns totally made inside of that state are not controlled by the Feds but by the state itself. DoJ issued an opinion that the states that said that are dead wrong, most likely on the premise that something that went into the manufacturte of that gun somewhere along the line crossed a state line so the bend product is subject to theb interstate commerce clause.
Where there’s a suppression of free will, there’s a way.
LikeLiked by 1 person