First ruling on Individual Right and free Carry

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Big Dog

    Active Member
    Dec 16, 2012
    106
    North East
    In 1857 the Supreme Court ruled that Dred Scott was not a citizen and that he was not entitled to sue in court. Basically they screwed the guy and he remained a slave until his emancipation was bought.

    In any event, here is a paragraph from the ruling:

    It would give to persons of the negro race, ...the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, ...to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased ...the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.

    I never see this cited when the discussion over the 2A take place. This 1857 ruling clearly sets a precedence, or as libs like to drone on with regard to Roe, stare decisis. Why is this not used in arguments to the Court?

    The Dred Scott ruling was terrible but the reasons given are not incorrect. A free person is entitled to do all of this...
     

    JMangle

    Handsome Engineer
    May 11, 2008
    816
    Mississippi
    In 1857 the Supreme Court ruled that Dred Scott was not a citizen and that he was not entitled to sue in court. Basically they screwed the guy and he remained a slave until his emancipation was bought.

    In any event, here is a paragraph from the ruling:

    It would give to persons of the negro race, ...the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, ...to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased ...the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.

    I never see this cited when the discussion over the 2A take place. This 1857 ruling clearly sets a precedence, or as libs like to drone on with regard to Roe, stare decisis. Why is this not used in arguments to the Court?

    The Dred Scott ruling was terrible but the reasons given are not incorrect. A free person is entitled to do all of this...

    Gura usually cites it.

    And yes, it is as powerful as you think it is. It speaks to how Americans viewed guns and gun rights back in the day.
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    In 1857 the Supreme Court ruled that Dred Scott was not a citizen and that he was not entitled to sue in court. Basically they screwed the guy and he remained a slave until his emancipation was bought.

    In any event, here is a paragraph from the ruling:

    It would give to persons of the negro race, ...the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, ...to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased ...the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.

    I never see this cited when the discussion over the 2A take place. This 1857 ruling clearly sets a precedence, or as libs like to drone on with regard to Roe, stare decisis. Why is this not used in arguments to the Court?

    The Dred Scott ruling was terrible but the reasons given are not incorrect. A free person is entitled to do all of this...


    As jmagle noted it I'd cited that's how I come to know of it.

    But dred Scott is as you say a very troubling case. Its can emotional hot button which in many cases is best left unpressed

    If people could think rationally in the face of emotions we could cite it, but in that case we would not need to.


    I like to soften them up a bit first. Get them used to thinking.
     

    thebullpupkid

    Active Member
    Feb 6, 2009
    632
    Right near the beach!
    As jmagle noted it I'd cited that's how I come to know of it.

    But dred Scott is as you say a very troubling case. Its can emotional hot button which in many cases is best left unpressed

    If people could think rationally in the face of emotions we could cite it, but in that case we would not need to.


    I like to soften them up a bit first. Get them used to thinking.

    Considering the other aspects of Dred, this may help bolster your argument:MLK and His Guns
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,877
    Yes , you are Right. But in recent decades the case has been so villified that any attempt that could be spun into "supporting the decision" would massively backfire in public outcry , and drownd out the legitimite points of law therein.
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    this is best used in private conversation... once the`ball is rolling our way.

    I know its hard but we need to be slow and steady..

    Took time to get thus blanked up and it will take time to get back to sanity.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    It has been cited in briefs by our side, usually preceded with the words,"We are loathe to cite this."

    It's also strange that this was in Dred Scott, since in 1857 the 2A was not incorporated. So if your state didn't have a RKBA amendment, you had no RKBA.
     

    abean4187

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 16, 2013
    1,327
    Citing racist rulings that were obviously wrong doesn’t do us much good. The fact that they said he was to remain a slave basically makes everything else said in that case null and void to most people. It’s a nice reference to us in terms of the mentality of gun ownership at the time but I doubt it will win us many friends.
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    It has been cited in briefs by our side, usually preceded with the words,"We are loathe to cite this."

    It's also strange that this was in Dred Scott, since in 1857 the 2A was not incorporated. So if your state didn't have a RKBA amendment, you had no RKBA.

    Well not quite IMHO. Incorporation . is an ad hoc fix

    Fundamental rights are not less fundamental under the local tryrant than the federal one. Thus the accident of history is all that makes incorporation necessary.

    It was not a right created by the constitution ... The only issue is juristtion and I think stuff like supreme law of the land cover it.

    Incorporation is not needed for fundamental rights. Never was. IMHO.

    But looks like we are stuck with it

    Now on areas of shared power there may be an issue. But not fundamental human preexisting natural rights that do not and can not come from government. Any government federal state local...

    Etc .
     

    JPG

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 5, 2012
    6,996
    Calvert County
    It was decided in 1857, precedent was made - why all these cases? It seems clear cut to me that "Shall not be infringed" means just that.
     

    Big Dog

    Active Member
    Dec 16, 2012
    106
    North East
    I have not read all the rulings but I usually read that the issue has never been addressed until recently etc. This is obviously not true. Sure, the main item was a horrible decision but the quoted text is sound and gives stare decisis. I know that using a ruling that supported slavery and that was negated by the 14th Amendment causes some non thinkers to become apoplectic but it is a historical ruling nonetheless.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,919
    Messages
    7,258,819
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom