No Guarantee of a Gun: How and Why the Second Amendment Means Exactly What It Says
The information in this book proves by means of credible and irrefutable documentary evidence that the Supreme Court's decision on June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller, which held that the Second Amendment protects the right of an individual to possess and carry weapons, was incorrect. And the information in this book forms the foundation of what would have been the correct decision in that case.
Second Amendment commentary and case law are incorrect. But unfortunately, they are relied upon by today's scholars and jurists. However, this book, written in plain English instead of the legalese that many persons find unappealing about books pertaining to legal subjects, takes the bold step of disproving these incorrect authorities on the most controversial and puzzling provision of the United States Constitution, and it meets that challenge.
While other books on the Second Amendment rely largely on incorrect commentary and case law, this book uses credible and irrefutable documentary evidence to uncover the substance of the Second Amendment. By proving that Second Amendment commentary and case law are incorrect, this book will become both the preeminent treatise on the Second Amendment and a landmark book in the field of Constitutional law. And while gun control has been a highly controversial issue for a long time, the debate on gun control has been improperly bifurcated into what is good public policy and what is Constitutional. This book eliminates the Constitutional component of that debate so that the debate can be focused solely on what is good public policy.
Other books written on the Second Amendment propose incorrect theories or attempt to reconcile its two supposed clauses. However, this book is the best book ever written on the Second Amendment because it does what no other book has ever done. It uncovers, by means of documentary evidence instead of mere argument, the true meanings of the terms A well regulated Militia, people, keep, and bear arms.
Results 1-5 of 91
However, by proving that the Second Amendment does not guarantee any individual right to possess and carry weapons, this book can move the debate on gun control out of its erroneous context of Constitutional law and leave it solely in ...
189] And Brannon P. Denning (1996) said According to a poll taken in the spring of 1995, seventy-five percent of Americans believe citizens possess a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. [f] [144: p. 1001] He said also In that ...
... an Arkansas court stated But I am not aware that this right has ever become the subject of any adjudication in the Federal ... a Minnesota court stated Whatever the scope of any common-law or constitutional right to bear arms, ...
The right exists independent of the existence of the militia, but because of the need for the militia in ... 472] He said also It would be interesting to see what would become of existing constitutional law if the Supreme Court gave the ...
Second Amendment's protection to collective rights of militias affronts the most basic protections of the Second ... and accordingly “there can be no serious claim to any express constitutional right of an individual to possess a ...
What people are saying - Write a review
PART III TYING UP LOOSE ENDS OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT
PART IV THE SECOND AMENDMENT VIOLATION AND CLAIM