The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - Guess who filed an amicus brief favorable to the 2A being incorporated?

ftd · July 8, 2009, 12:57 AM

Could someone please explain why the 14th amendment is even needed to uphold the right inumerated by the 2nd amendment, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.", to the states?

The 1st amendment only specifically states that "Congress shall make no law respecting ... , or prohibiting the... , or abridging the..... , or the right of the.... , and to petition the Government for....". I understand the need for the 14th here because 1A only prohibits congressional action (although the court has allowed congress, in many ways, to do what is prohibited by the 1st amendment.

Not so with 2A. 2A does not limit to only federal authority but instead gauantees that a "right of the people.. shall not be infringed". It is the right of the people and not a whim of the government. You can argue about the exact meaning of the front part of 2A, but how many ways can you read "shall not be infringed"?

The same thing, "right of the people...", holds true for 4A, 5A, and 6A. 8A also does not limit to only the Federal government, but does not state "right of the people...."

3A has the "but in a manner to be prescribed by law" out and 7A has a similar " than according to the rules of the common law" out. But neither of these give any out to any specific government entity.

So, as far as the first 8 amends go, only 1A should need the 14th to compel state compliance.

I realize that I am ignorant and naive. What am I missing?

July 8, 2009, 12:57 AM	#22
ftd Senior Member Join Date: February 11, 2009 Location: Virginia Posts: 109	I'm no lawyer, but.... Could someone please explain why the 14th amendment is even needed to uphold the right inumerated by the 2nd amendment, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.", to the states? The 1st amendment only specifically states that "Congress shall make no law respecting ... , or prohibiting the... , or abridging the..... , or the right of the.... , and to petition the Government for....". I understand the need for the 14th here because 1A only prohibits congressional action (although the court has allowed congress, in many ways, to do what is prohibited by the 1st amendment. Not so with 2A. 2A does not limit to only federal authority but instead gauantees that a "right of the people.. shall not be infringed". It is the right of the people and not a whim of the government. You can argue about the exact meaning of the front part of 2A, but how many ways can you read "shall not be infringed"? The same thing, "right of the people...", holds true for 4A, 5A, and 6A. 8A also does not limit to only the Federal government, but does not state "right of the people...." 3A has the "but in a manner to be prescribed by law" out and 7A has a similar " than according to the rules of the common law" out. But neither of these give any out to any specific government entity. So, as far as the first 8 amends go, only 1A should need the 14th to compel state compliance. I realize that I am ignorant and naive. What am I missing?