Monday, December 13, 2010

Justice Breyer

Let me just say for the record that Justice Breyer is a hack. Not only did his dissent in Heller contain glaring factual errors, but he seems to cling to such falsehoods even now.

He appears to be claiming that James Madison did not believe in any individual right to keep & bear arms and that Madison only included the 2nd Amendment so that the Constitution could be ratified. Has he never read the Federalist Papers? Federalist #46?

There are several major problems with his argument. The United States Constitution was ratified June 21, 1788. The 2nd Amendment was ratified December 15, 1791. (along with the rest of the original BOR) For those of you who can count that's 3 and a half years after the Constitution had already been ratified.

Here's the money quote from Breyer which really shows how little respect he has for the rights of American citizens.

"Are you a sportsman? Do you like to shoot pistols at targets? Well, get on the subway and go to Maryland. There is no problem, I don't think, for anyone who really wants to have a gun."

No problem? Tell that to someone who tries to legally buy a gun in DC, or Chicago, or Massachusetts etc. If I have to go through an onerous, expensive process just to buy the gun and then drive to another state and/or city to shoot it, that is a problem. You're telling me that going through this process and then having to go to another state to shoot isn't a problem? Bullshit. Of course you also can't just go to Maryland, because their rules for transporting firearms are insane.

Imagine if I had to jump through hoops and spend hundreds to get a library card, then had to drive 20 or even 50 miles out of my way to go to a library because they were illegal where I lived. I think Justice Breyer would have a problem with that. I suspect Breyer's intelligent rebuttal to that would be "but guns are different..."

Would Breyer have said such a thing to black men in the south who were being denied the ability to vote because of poll taxes and literacy tests? If Delaware banned Jehovah's Witnesses I suppose Justice Breyer would tell them "tough luck, drive to Maryland if you want to have religious freedom." He's saying that if you're Constitutional rights don't exist in one state you should suck it up and to exercize them somewhere else. I don't know what country Breyer lives in, but I live in the United States of America.

Ignoring the fact that Breyer is wrong about Madison's reasons for including the 2nd Amendment, what difference does that make? It was included in the Bill of Rights and ratified. That remains true no matter how badly Breyer tries to read it out of the Constitution.

Breyer's essentially saying that Madison didn't really believe in the 2nd Amendment, nor did he really intend for it to be a right of citizens, he just stuck it in so the Constitution could be ratified. If that's his argument for claiming that the 2nd Amendment doesn't really count he's setting a dangerous precedent. After all, using Breyer's "logic" you could say the same about the entirety of the original Bill of Rights.

"Oh, Amendment _____, founder X didn't really believe in that right, they just stuck it in the Constitution extraneously to help move along the ratification process, so we're not going to recognize it."

The words I've bolded and italicized above summarize Breyer's argument. I'm sorry, but Breyer's position has to be one of the most moronic and intellectually vapid arguments I've ever seen. The Amendments contained in the Bill of Rights were written to be limits on Federal power. That was their primary purpose. For a sitting Supreme Court justice to say that this was not the case, that one of our rights was just thrown in for ratification purposes shows an alarming level of contempt for the rights of American citizens.

Personally, I think Justice Breyer is a liberal statist who is simply pissed off that he wasn't able to read a fundamental protection in the Bill of Rights out of the Constitution. You lost Justice Breyer. Your attempts to curtail my rights were unsuccessful. Deal with it. Also, should you try again to read the 2nd Amendment out of the Constitution, I would remind you that We The People have guns.


Bob S. said...

And one of the biggest problems for Justice Breyer is the fact that regardless of reason, the amendment is in the Constitution.

I think that is why he spends so much time trying to dance around the issue.

Legislative intent is one thing but the consequences of their actions are still with us -- a protected right to keep and bear arms.

His entire argument seems to boil down to "Firearms, ECK!!!!! I'll wish away their protection!!" as he clicks his heels three times.

R. Stanton Scott said...

And once again Mike calls someone a liar, despite the fact that he hasn't the intellectual chops to make the case that Breyer is wrong. Just what does Madison say in Federalist 46 that shows he believed in an individual right to keep and bear arms? Can you either of you point out the "falsehoods" in Breyer's Heller opinion?

I doubt it. Mike hasn't even a clue just what a lie is, much less a notion of how to refute one.

Weer'd Beard said...

Speaking of lack of intellectual chops.

You're a piece of work, Stan.

Mike W. said...

Once again Stan is unwilling to attack my position, the substance. If you have an intelligent refutation of what I wrote please present it. If not you're nothing more than a pompous, bigoted troll who is sick of being intellectually bested by yours truly time & time again.