Monday, December 13, 2010

Justice Breyer on the 2nd Amendment

via Fat White Man who said the Justice of the Supreme Court is "Constitutionally retarded."

Madison "was worried about opponents who would think Congress would call up state militias and nationalize them. 'That can't happen,' said Madison," said Breyer, adding that historians characterize Madison's priority as, "I've got to get this document ratified."

Therefore, Madison included the Second Amendment to appease the states, Breyer said.

"If you're interested in history, and in this one history was important, then I think you do have to pay attention to the story," Breyer said. "If that was his motive historically, the dissenters were right. And I think more of the historians were with us."

That being the case, and particularly since the Founding Fathers did not foresee how modern day would change individual behavior, government bodies can impose regulations on guns, Breyer concluded.
It is the epitome of arrogance to call a Supreme Court Justice, a man who's spent his entire life studying the law, "Constitutionally retarded." Besides we all know the retarded one is Scalia, not Breyer

What's your opinion? Aside from the fascinating epithet used by FWM, does the description of Breyer amount to "rewriting history?"

Please leave a comment..


  1. Hmm, so I guess this post is the epitome of arrogance huh MikeB?

    What a tool.

  2. Rewriting everything, not just history, but the US Constitution. Isn't it obvious how people try to either get rid of,or come up with a silly interpretation of the militia concept.

    Look at Switzerland,

    "They spend an entire summer or part of winter undergoing their basic training."

    I am curious as to how many "Second Amendment Supporters" would sign up for that followed by a 30 year service commitment! After all, a big issue with militia service is exemptions from Service.

  3. considering how the power of money has undermined the US Supreme Court and how the Court appointed Bush president, the recent remarks by the center left Breyer reaffirm the influence of money on the US Supreme Court and the role the government places in protecting the wealthy over the masses. Breyer and Stevens both have the same conflict of interest and can be influenced by powers within DC.