Ruling on the Right to Bear Arms - Laurence Silberman

Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2009/08/05/Uncommon_Knowledge_Judge_Laurence_Silberman

Judge Laurence Silberman explains the origins of his ruling against the ban on handguns in Washington, D.C. He explains, "It wasn't a right to bear arms granted by the Constitution, it was a right that was protected by the Constitution."

-----

Laurence Silberman, Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, speaks with Peter Robinson about his landmark ruling on Second Amendment Rights.

Silberman also weighs in on Constitutional originalism, law schools, and the evidence for declaring war in Iraq. - Hoover Institution

Laurence Silberman is a senior federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He was appointed in October 1985 by Ronald Reagan and took senior status on November 1, 2000.

He continues to serve on the court. On June 11, 2008, Silberman was named a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honor granted by the government of the United States.

Peter M. Robinson is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, where he writes about business and politics, edits Hoover's quarterly journal, the Hoover Digest, and hosts Hoover's television program, Uncommon Knowledge.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• supreme
• court
• supremes
• gun
• control
• rights
• banned
• second
• amendment
• 2nd
• unconstitutional
• guns
• scotus
• chicago
• case
• laws
• fora.tv
• foratv
• fora
• tv

[entropyfu]

You might as well post the whole thing:

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

[freesk8]

The pre-existing right is the right of self defense, which exists before kings and parliaments come in to existence. It is a natural right, that comes from the ownership each individual has in his or her self.

We each own our own bodies. We are not owned by any government, nor by the collective community.

[leicamaster]

Makes sense to me. People may not like guns, but it's our right to have them.

[lezamaj7]

he looks like Raymond's dad from Everybody loves raymond

[shakaz01]

In the context of the constitution, the right to bear arms seems to be collective and only for the defense of the nation as oppose to individual defense.

Even if the people can form militias constitutionally congress is suppose to regulate them and even have officers and discipline, so it could not be referring to simply individuals and their personal right to bear arms. I think a constitutional amendment would solve the argument.

[shakaz01]

Militia: Article 2 : section 10: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

[saved03]

@freesk8 Good argument! You know that saying the pen is mighter than the sword. Well without the sword would the pen have a freedom to express it's self? Freedom of speach solely depends upon the right to keep and bear arms. Remember what happens to people who spoke out against Hitler and Stalin. Shouting out in gun fire speaks louder than one's voice or one's notebook. Ann's diary didn't stop the Holocaust. Soldiers with guns did.

[dvcrsn]

Using that standard--you lack the right to use modern communication technology

[trickmastermonkey]

currently, there is now a shortage of ammunition virtually in every store in the U.S. that sells firearms.

if there is ever a revolution over citizens' rights to own a gun and defend themselves in an attack from enemies foreign and domestic, worst case scenario you can all bet your civil liberty longing asses the president is gonna have a shitstorm on his hands

[Robfenix]

I agree that that is what the 5 Justices in the Keller majority asctually believe. They will just never say it. Scalia has consistently railed against using Natural Law reasoning, yet he uses it the most. He just doesn't say he is using it.

[verstwo2]

I was listing examples of weapons that didn't exist when the US constitution was written.