- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 31,057
- Reaction score
- 3,969
- Location
- not here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Justice Joseph Story, Supreme Court Justice 1811-1835, made a commentary about the 2nd amendment, one of his remarks was:
The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium (defense) of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will...enable the people to resist and triumph over them..."
He went onto warn about the erosion of this amendment: "And yet...it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline...that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt;
and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights."
The only current on the Supreme Court that has the courage to stand up for the 2nd amendment is Justice Thomas.
"Palladuim" is a rare metal; it does not infer "defense". Here is what Story was referring to in total.
Amendment II: Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1890--91
§ 1890. The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them. And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights.
It was about the militia. So cherry picking from the article is disingenuous.