Gun Control & RKBA

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)

6. For close to 200 years..... but a collective right.

Sat Feb 14, 2015, 09:50 AM

Feb 2015

No it hasn't. The collective right theory didn't exist until the 1930s. That is why NFA created what was then an astronomical tax instead of an outright ban, because the writers feared a ban would be overturned.

The collective rights theory is a relative newcomer to constitutional jurisprudence. It
arose solely during the twentieth century and grew popular among jurists, social
commentators, and some members of the organized American bar only during the
second half of the twentieth century. n17 That the theory ever breathed life at all is
owed primarily to an irresolute 1939 United States Supreme Court opinion notable
only for its lack of clarity.

http://constitution.org/lrev/roots/death_collective_right_theory.pdf
Laws being overturned based on the individual rights theory date back to the 1840s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nunn_v._Georgia

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The RKBA v 2nd Amendment [View all] discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2015 OP

The Amendment does not safeinOhio Feb 2015 #1

the amendment does not... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2015 #2

To secure a free natio safeinOhio Feb 2015 #3

What's the purpose of the other amendments? Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #4

So, what they really meant was not what they said safeinOhio Feb 2015 #5

For close to 200 years..... but a collective right. gejohnston Feb 2015 #6

Why is the second half of the statement always ignored? Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #7

More to the point of the 1st and 2nd safeinOhio Feb 2015 #8

That refers to specific practices in specific places. I doubt Bloomberg and his frothing horde Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #9

which case is that? mauren Feb 2018 #34

LINK: discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2018 #35

Go read the British Bill of Rights of 1689 hack89 Feb 2015 #11

On the contrary... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2015 #24

I quote... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2015 #10

See, THIS is why I switched sides in the gun debate. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #12

"Bloomberg and his frothing hord" safeinOhio Feb 2015 #13

unlike child killers and future muderers Duckhunter935 Feb 2015 #14

How would you describe a group that relies on calling people Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #15

Not like safeinOhio Feb 2015 #17

People who want to disarm peaceable people are grabbers. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #18

Disregard the extremes on both sides safeinOhio Feb 2015 #20

I can't help but notice that as an interlocutor you are Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #21

I hope you will also point out Duckhunter935 Feb 2015 #27

all on DU support reasonable gun laws Duckhunter935 Feb 2015 #26

authoritarian racists like Bloomberg? gejohnston Feb 2015 #33

I'm guessing you were responding to someone else discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2015 #16

No, I was responding to you. Arguments should be evidence based, as yours is. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #19

Please see #22 discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2015 #23

I miss him too gejohnston Feb 2015 #25

I fear the same for ProgressiveProfessive discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2015 #28

I know for certain he isn't gejohnston Feb 2015 #29

They are good people. They are on my list of those I look forward to meeting one day. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2015 #30

sad discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2015 #31

I understand discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2015 #22

Well regulated militia vs. standing army JackW Feb 2015 #32