Re: US District Judge (NY) rules 2nd not individual right

[Ron Moore]

I just finished reading the text of S659 (better late than never I suppose) which is designed to protect dealers/manufactuers from frivilous lawsuits, etc. 

The following is a part of the bill:

SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSES.

        (a)FINDINGS.�The Congress finds the following:

                (1)Citizens have a right,protected by the Sec-
                ond Amendment to the United States Constitution,
                to keep and bear arms.

For you constitutional scholars and keeping within the limits of this list, would not a Supreme Court which says the legislature should be heeded whenever possible find it necessary to rule that the Second Amendment does guarantee a personal right?



At 04:46 PM 10/27/2003 -0800, you wrote:

Well, I hope this is on redundant...I couldn't find any prior reference to it.

Brian Beck
---------------------

More funny business from Clinton appointees.  New York is one of six
states that does not support the RKBA in its state constitution (the six
are California, Iowa, Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, and New York).

"Challenge to Ban on Non-Resident Weapons Permit Fails"
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1065122107783

"Adopting a position that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution
does not protect a fundamental individual right, a Northern District
judge has held that a U.S. naval attorney with top-secret security
clearance can be barred by New York from carrying a concealed weapon
while visiting relatives in Ulster County, N.Y."

And...

"But in a recent decision, U.S. District Judge Norman A. Mordue of
Syracuse rejected Bach's claims and dismissed the suit.

"In view of the weight of authority, including the present state of
Supreme Court and 2nd Circuit jurisprudence, the court adopts the view
that the Second Amendment is not a source of individual rights," he
wrote."

Ron Moore