IT IS TIME TO MAKE THE JUDICIARY "INTELLECTUALLY RESPONSIBLE" FOR THE DECISIONS THEY MAKE. IF THEY WANT RESPECT, MAKE THEM EARN IT. THE RULES OF LOGIC APPLY TO EVERYONE. PART 3.

 

As a way of a reminder, here are the First 2 Amendments to the "BILL OF RIGHTS."

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

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.

As I pointed out in Part 2, the First Amendment:

- Deals with behaviors, or actions, that must be addressed by the Court System. 

The Goal is to Protect Specific Examples that the American Citizen may engage in from Government Interference, or place limitations on said Behaviors and Actions from becoming Negative Influences on Society in general, or creates an unreasonably hostile environment that impacts on other Citizens.

Further, there are no Qualifications or Examples that must be taken in account before the Courts issue a ruling. The Judicial System was given broad latitude on how to interpret the Scope of the "RIGHTS' contained in the 1st Amendment.

Neither of the above applies to the 2nd Amendment.

- While the First Amendment deals with Actions and Behaviors, the 2nd Amendment refers to the possession of a specific object. 

-  In addition, again unlike the 1st Amendment, the 2nd Amendment GIVES SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS TO GUIDE THE COURT SYSTEM ON HOW TO PROCEED WHEN DEALING WITH ISSUES INVOLVING THE 2ND AMENDMENT.

THE INITIAL WORDING BEGINS WITH : "A WELL REGULATED MILITIA..." Up until very recently, U.S. COURTS HAVE UNDERSTOOD WHAT WAS OBVIOUS TO THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION: THAT HAVING MOBS OF ARMED CITIZENS ROAMING THE COUNTRY, WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORITY, DIRECTION, OR MEMBERSHIP RESTRICTIONS, WAS NOT CONDUCIVE TO A STABLE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. THEREFORE, THE "RIGHT" TO "KEEP" AND "BEAR" ARMS WAS TO BE GIVEN TO THOSE WHOSE TRAINING AND LOYALTY WERE NOT QUESTIONABLE.

The recent SUPREME COURT RULING IS A FARCE. IT IGNORES THE WORDING AND THE MEANING OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT AND ERASES 2 CENTURIES OF JUDICIAL PRECEDENT...

TO BE CONTINUED.