No Guarantee of a Gun: How and Why the Second Amendment Means Exactly What It SaysThe 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. |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 100
For example, Akhil Reed Amar (1992) said Our Second Amendment is about protecting against a central standing army that's going to be used by a national government to impose perhaps unpopular policies on a resistant populace.
the technology of weapons and in military technique have rendered the armed citizen wholly impractical as a substitute for standing armies and much less potent as a deterrent to despotism. At the same time, the increased destructive ...
... the amendment could forestall reliance upon a professional, federal standing army, which was seen as a threat to liberty. ... was intended to help preserve the political and military balance between the state and federal government.
... who feared that the power of a large federal standing army would diminish the “security of a free state.” The second amendment guaranteed the perpetual existence of a viable militia as a continued check on the military power of the ...
... militias and by protecting the ability of the militias to equip themselves, the amendment provided an important safeguard against congressional efforts to increase the need for or justification of a national standing army.
What people are saying - Write a review
Contents
| 43 | |
PART III TYING UP LOOSE ENDS OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT | 551 |
PART IV THE SECOND AMENDMENT VIOLATION AND CLAIM | 699 |
Back Cover | 761 |
Other editions - View all
No Guarantee of a Gun: How and Why the Second Amendment Means Exactly What ... John Massaro No preview available - 2009 |
Common terms and phrases
Bibliographic information
| Title | No Guarantee of a Gun: How and Why the Second Amendment Means Exactly What It Says |
| Author | John Massaro |
| Publisher | Author House, 2009 |
| ISBN | 1468529382, 9781468529388 |
| Length | 768 pages |
| Subjects | › Law / General |
| Export Citation | BiBTeX EndNote RefMan |