Just as how voting rights were enforced for blacks and women, 2A as our next civil rights movement

Just as how voting rights were enforced for blacks and women, I can see 2A as our next civil rights movement.



The Second Amendment: Enforcing the Heller Decision

Spread the word, especially those going to the VA lobby day rally.

When the public views the Second Amendment in the same light as 14th, 19th and 26th Amendments of voting rights for blacks and women, perhaps seeing the Second Amendment as our civil rights will gain greater support.

When people start to argue about gun control, I bring up voting rights and ask, "Should everyone be allowed to vote regardless of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, physical disability?" Of course, their answer is yes.

Then I ask, "Should everyone be allowed to have freedom of speech regardless of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, physical disability?"

When they say yes, I then ask, "So should everyone be allowed to self defense regardless of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, physical disability? Especially victims of rape and violent crime?" When they try to spew the automatic argument points, I firmly repeat my question and ask them to think about it in reference to freedom of speech and voting rights.

And they go silent.

Keep in mind the Supreme Court ruled to expand the Second Amendment as individual rights, to self defense.

The right to self defense will not be infringed by the Supreme Court; rather expand it further, such as 50 state carry outside the home in defense of individuals regardless where they are. And just as the First Amendment protects modern types of speech/communication, the Second Amendment protects modern types of firearms to include semi-auto rifles and ammunition storage devices called "magazines" which courts already ruled are also "arms" protected by the Second Amendment (Read post #7 and #8).

Our founders added the Second Amendment to preserve the First Amendment and the Constitution, in order for us to pursue freedom and liberty from tyranny. That was the original intent of the Constitution after the founders fought off the tyranny of British rule.

The Supreme Court is becoming "Originalist" to honor the words our framers wrote to protect our union and specifically tasked the Supreme Court to be the backstop for the Constitution if and when the executive and legislative branches failed to uphold it. As justice Gorsuch spoke, it is the job of the Supreme Court justices to enforce the Constitution and all of the Bill of Rights Amendments that modernized this enduring document.

As our founders foresaw, the Supreme Court won't fail this original intent of the charter with the "We the People". And USA cannot be compared to any other country as no other country has the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...with-question-on-the-second-amendment.856201/

Starting at 12:25 minute of video, justice Gorsuch talks about the Bill of Rights.

"Bill of Rights and liberty ... Bill of Right is a set of promises on paper ... What makes a promise worth the words on paper is the enforcement mechanisms behind it ... Our Bill of Rights is excellent.

... Judges are the backstop to ensure rights and liberties, that is our job"

At 16:10 minute of video, when asked about president Trump commenting in 2017 that "Neil Gorsuch, he will save people's Second Amendment rights", justice Gorsuch replied, "My business is your rights, ALL OF THEM, are enforced"

At 16:45 minute of video, when asked about the US Constitution needing to change to better reflect current times, Gorsuch replied, "The original Constitution now includes 27 amendments passed by the 'We the People' ... 'We the People' amended the Constitution, ... to fix the injustices... improved the Constitution, made it a better document. And that is the proper process to do that"

He then does a great job of explaining the meaning of "Originalism".

At 30:10 minute of video, interviewer says, "Now there are solid 5 conservative members on the court. Something has changed." You bet "something" has changed.



Justice Gorsuch defines and explains SCOTUS becoming "Originalist"

"I am an originalist ... We have a written constitution that our founder wrote down ... They made a charter among 'We the people' ... This is what we agreed to as to what the government's powers are and what they are not ... What our rights are. Originalists ... honor what's written there. Honor those words ... Don't make stuff up and don't take things away. That's the idea"



Justice Gorsuch continues, "I have two rules for my law clerks ... Rule #1: Don't make stuff up ... Rule #2: When it doubt, refer back to Rule #1."

"... when it comes to the role of the judiciary, I believe that the role is to be faithful to the original meaning of the constitution."

When asked to explain what it means to be originalist or constitutionalist, "I want an enduring Constitution and the idea of originalism is just simply that judges should follow the original meaning of the words on the page. And, neither add things that aren't there nor take away things that are there. And, I worry that both of those things happen when we depart from the original meaning of the Constitution."

When asked what James Madison (who helped write the Constitution/Bill of Rights) would say about today's government, "Well, I think one thing he might tell us is to pay attention to the separation of powers ... the truth is that our rights, including the separation of powers, are only as good as the people who want to keep them there."

"We the people can do this ... We can govern ourselves."

See you in court.

And the other piece of the Supreme Court "Originalist" puzzle is justice Kavanaugh.

In Heller 2 case in 2012, a 50 page dissent was written by a judge in disdain of court's actions essentially saying DC's ban on semi-auto rifle is unconstitutional under Heller.

This dissent was written by ... < wait for it > ... now justice Kavanaugh! - https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/inter...C748525791F004D84F9/$file/10-7036-1333156.pdf

Interviewed on Fox 5 NY about Judge Kavanaugh and the Second Amendment



Are Semiautomatic Rifles Protected by the Second Amendment? - YES!

And in light of recent Texas church shooting ... "Keep" means store and "Bear" means carry.

Justice Ginsburg defined, “... natural meaning of ‘bear arms’ is to 'wear, bear, or carry ... upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose ... of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.'” - https://fedsoc.org/commentary/publications/concealed-carry-and-the-right-to-bear-arms

The Supreme Court explicitly included both concealed carry and open carry in its definition of “bear arms".

Does the Right to Bear Arms Include a Right to Carry Handguns in Public?

And this was aired on PBS Newshour - Second Amendment Scholar says Assault Weapons Ban "won't pass constitutional muster"

Since millions of hand guns and long guns are in "common use" and the Second Amendment is worded, "A well regulated militia ... , ("coma") the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" with a deliberate "coma" to differentiate right to keep and bear arms was meant for the people (After much research, intent at the time of the writing of the Constitution applied to individual rights as affirmed by Heller ruling).

The term "Assault Weapon" targets cosmetic features and these popular firearms commonly used are actually legal semi-auto firearms and ban won't pass constitutional muster. Millions of "Assault Weapons" were purchased legally and are "commonly used" with large capacity magazines and ban on firearms and magazines won't pass constitutional muster.

Government's own studies found there was no appreciable reduction in violent crimes from "Assault Weapons" ban and only took guns away from law abiding citizens. Mass shootings (4 or more people killed) occur in so called "gun free zones" and may actually attract shooters to these areas because they are unprotected.