The Second Amendment and the Law

Below you will discover a growing number of different court decisions. As well as commentaries on Fundamental law, and scholarly legal opinions. That touch upon the Right of We The People to Keep and Bear Arms. The mere fact of the historical presence of such cases and opinion. Further proves the Right as belonging to We The People, whether in or out of the 'militia'. And that, that specific right was intended to be secured against encroachment from "ALL forms of positive government", (See Federalist #28).

Only decisions or commentary that are supportive of true original intent are shown here. The views of those that are the enemies of individual freedom and liberty would justly seem to be deemed as irrelevant. This, due to the fact that the courts are commanded to base their decisions acording to the Fundamental law, (See Federalist #78).

The following selected cases and works prove the contention of individual right beyond all shadow of a doubt:

"Indeed, is not this so of acts done in the execution of any crime? Discharging a loaded pistol at a target is an innocent pastime; discharging a loaded pistol at a human being, with felonious intent, takes a quality from such intent and may constitute murder."

- Mr. Justice McKenna, Delivering the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, [HYDE v. U S, 225 U.S. 347 (1912), Page 225 U.S. 347, 360]

"If the Fifth Amendment confers its rights on all the world except Americans engaged in defending it, the same must be true of the companion civil-rights Amendments, for none of them is limited by its express terms, territorially or as to persons. Such a construction would mean that during military occupation irreconcilable enemy elements, guerrilla fighters, and "werewolves" could require the American Judiciary to assure them freedoms of speech, press, and assembly as in the First Amendment, right to bear arms as in the Second, security against "unreasonable" searches and seizures as in the Fourth, as well as rights to jury trial as in the Fifth and Sixth Amendments."

- MR. JUSTICE JACKSON, U.S. Supreme Court, [JOHNSON v. EISENTRAGER, 339 U.S. 763 (1950). Decided June 5, 1950. Page 339 U.S. 763, 784]

"The question, whether a law be void for its repugnancy to the constitution, is, at all times, a question of much delicacy, which ought seldom, if ever, to be decided in the affirmative in a doubtful case. The court, when impelled by duty to render such a judgment, would be unworthy of its station, could it be unmindful of the solemn obligations which that station imposes. But it is not on slight implication and vague conjecture that the legislature is to be pronounced to have transcended its powers, and its acts to be considered as void. The opposition between the constitution and the law should be such that the judge feels a clear and strong conviction of their incompatibility with each other.

- Chief Justice John Marshall, U.S. Supreme Court, Fletcher V. Peck, [6 Cranch, 87.] 1810.

Mr. Chief Justice Marshall had also stated:

"Also, the conditions and circumstances of the period require a finding that while the stated purpose of the right to arms was to secure a well-regulated militia, the right to self-defense was assumed by the Framers."

- John Marshall, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice. [As quoted in Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. 243, 251 (1846); State v. Dawson, 272 N.C. 535, 159 S.E.2d 1, 9 (1968).]

**********

"The Constitution and laws of the United States "are the supreme law of the land," anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary, notwithstanding." Their supremacy is thus declared in express terms: "Whatever conflicts therewith has no operative or obligatory force. Allegiance to the United States, and loyalty to the United States Constitution and laws, are the paramount duty of every citizen. Within their legitimate sphere, they command the obedience of all, and no State Constitution or statute can absolve any one therefrom....As it is both the right and duty of every citizen to become fully informed upon all governmental affairs, so as to discharge his many political obligations intelligently at the ballot-box, and in other legitimate ways; and the freedom of the press and of speech are guaranteed to him for that as well as other essential purposes; and as the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition for the redress of grievances, and to keep and bear arms, cannot be lawfully abridged or infringed...”

- CHARGE TO THE GRAND JURY BY THE COURT, United States Circuit Court, DISTRICT OF MISSOURI, SPECIAL JULY TERM, PRESENT: HON. JOHN CATRON, An Associate Justice of Supreme Court of United States. 1861. JULY 10, 1861.

**********

“...Which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them...”

Penn vs., Baltimore, "20 Persons, with Guns, Swords, Pistols and Blunderbusses", Feb. 23, 1737

Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England - Book I Chap. I & III

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - "The Supreme Law Of The Land"

The Constitution, The Declaration, Inalienable Rights and the U.S. Supreme Court

Thomas Jefferson on Arms and Right, 1743-1826

The Federalist Papers

U.S. Supreme Court cases that reference the Federalist Papers

James Wilson, 'Of the Natural Rights of Individuals', 1790-1792

Thomas Jefferson to John Jay and Chief Justices of the Supreme Court, July 18, 1793

U.S. v. Vigol, U.S. Supreme Court, "and had accompanied the armed party, who attacked the house of the Excise Officer", April Term, 1795

Vanhorne's Lessee v. Dorrance, U.S. Supreme Court, "One incroachment leads to another; precedent gives birth to precedent", April Term, 1795

A CHARGE to the GRAND JURIES of the COUNTY COURTS, By ALEXANDER ADDISON, Jan., 1799

Justice Iredell's statement to the Grand Jury, "armed and arrayed in a warlike and hostile manner, that is to say, with guns, swords, clubs, staves and other warlike weapons", April 11, 1799

Marbury v. Madison, U.S. Supreme Court, "The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws", 1803

BLACKSTONE'S COMMENTARIES By St. George Tucker, 1803

The Works of The Honourable James Wilson, L. L. D. - Vol. I, 1804

McIlvaine v. Coxe's Lessee, U.S. Supreme Court, "retained all the rights of birth", Feb. Term, 1805

Houston v. Moore, U.S. Supreme Court, "what arms and accoutrements the officers and privates shall provide themselves with", Feb. 16, 1820

Cohens v. Virginia, U.S. Supreme Court, "which is destined to unite and assimilate the principles of natural justice", 1821

Bliss v. Commonwealth, "The right existed at the adoption of the constitution; it had then no limits short of the moral power of the citizens to exercise it, and it in fact consisted in nothing else but in the liberty of the citizens to bear arms", 1822

Commonwealth v. Blanding, "The liberty of the press was to be unrestrained . . . like the right to keep fire arms", 1825

Excerpts from; Commentaries on American Law - Vol. II, Lecture XXIV, By James Kent, (1826-30)

Grainger v. The State, "He shot only to protect his person from threatened violence", 1830

Gray v. Combs, "The extent of the right of defense is necessarily undefined by the law of nature. Its only limit is necessity", Oct. 9, 1832

Commentaries on the Constitution - Book I, By Joseph Story, 1833

Outlines Of The Constitutional Jurisprudence Of The United States, "The right of every individual to keep arms for his defence", 1833

State v. Robert S. Huntley, "For any lawful purpose--either of business or amusement--the citizen is at perfect liberty to carry his gun", 1843

Nunn v. The State of Georgia, AMERICUS, JULY TERM, 1846

Luther v. Borden, U.S. Supreme Court, "Society has nothing to do with natural rights except to protect them", Jan. Term, 1849

The State v. J.B. Chandler, "which is calculated to incite men to a manly and noble defence of themselves, if neccessary, and of their country", 1850

State v J.T. Smith, "the second article of the amendments of the Constitution of the United States", July, 1856

U.S Supreme Court, Dred Scott v. Sandford, "to keep and carry arms wherever they went", Dec., 1856

Owen v. State, "the right, guarantied by the constitution to every citizen", 1858

State v. Jumel, "The statute in question does not infringe the right of the people to keep or bear arms. It is a measure of police...", 1858

Cockrum v. State, "securing the citizen from any infringement on the right to keep and bear arms", 1859

Augustus Pond v. The People, "as it is their right and duty to aid in preserving the peace" [Explains the law of Self-Defense in great detail], May 12, 1860

Stockdale v. State, "then the act itself was an infringement of the constitutional rights of the people to keep and bear arms", 1860

U.S. Circuit Court, DISTRICT OF MISSOURI, SPECIAL TERM, July 10, 1861

State v. Moore, "Those rules recognize a right in every man to defend his property, as well as person and habitation, by taking the life of the aggressor, as a natural right", 1863

Philips vs. Commonwealth, "legal self-defense may become a mockery and the sacred right itself a shadow...", 1865

Smith v. Ishenhour, "that Act, to take from the citizens of the county, their guns . . . His Honor was of opinion the law was in violation of the Constitution", 1866

Cummings v. Missouri, U.S. Supreme Court, "The loyal citizens of the State were obliged to array themselves against its government; they did so; they took up arms against it", Dec. Term, 1866

EX PARTE MILLIGAN, U.S. Supreme Court, "It is a question of the rights of the citizen in time of war", Dec. Term, 1866

Sutton v. State, "not intended to infringe upon the rights of any citizen to bear arms", 1867

Carico v. Commonwealth, "as a palladium of personal security and social order and peace", 1870

Gunn v. Barry, U.S. Supreme Court, "equipments and arms of a militia soldier", Dec. Term, 1872

Wiggins v. State Of Utah, U.S. Supreme Court, "Cases arise, as all agree, where a person assailed may, without retreating, oppose force to force, even to the death of the assailant", Oct. Term, 1876

Wilson v. State of Arkansas, "the Constitution guaranteed to the citizens the right to keep and bear arms for defense", 1878

U.S. v. Mora, U.S. Supreme Court, "always excepting the quantity of the said articles which may be necessary for the defence of the ships and of those who compose the crew", Oct. Term, 1878

The Common Law By Oliver W. Holmes, Jr., 1881

Presser v. State Of Illinois, "do not infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms", Jan. 4, 1886

Eastern Band Of Cherokee Indians v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "a rifle gun, with ammunition . . . to every head . . .who might wish to become a citizen of the United States", March 1, 1886

Denver & R G R Co. v. Harris, U.S. Supreme Court, "That the plaintiff engaged voluntarily, and not for his necessary self- defense", May 27, 1887

Cunningham v. Neagle, U.S. Supreme Court, "Judge FIELD is not your physical equal, and if any trouble shoud occur he would be very likely to use a weapon", April 14, 1890

New Orleans & N. E. R. Co.. v. Jopes, U.S. Supreme Court, "He has not forfelted his right of self-defense by assuming service with a common carrier; nor does the common carrier engage aught against the exercise of that right by his employe", Dec. 7, 1891

Boyd v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "The pistol or gun fired is the pistol or gun of each and every one of them", Jan. 4, 1892

Collins v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "went after his pistol, took it out of the pocket", Oct. 30, 1893

Allen v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "It is a law of protection; it is a law of necessity . . . It is a law of self- defense", Dec. 4, 1893

Gourko v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "he could not be found guilty of murder by reason of his having previously armed himself solely for self- defense", April 16, 1894

Starr v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "The motive of the accused in being where he was had nothing to do with the question of his right of self-defense", May 14, 1894

Thompson v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "Of course, the law of self-defense gives him the right to arm himself for the purpose of defending himself", Dec. 3, 1894

Allen v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court,"it is not converted into murder by reason of his having previously armed himself", April 8, 1895

Beard v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "the American mind seems to be very strongly against the enforcement of any rule which requires a person to flee when assailed", May 27, 1895

Allison v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "tending to establish that defendant carried his gun that morning for no purpose of offense or defense", Dec. 16, 1895

State v. Foutch, "he may exercise his right of self-defense, and is under no obligation to retreat or escape from his own premises' to avoid trouble", Feb. 20, 1896

Smith v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "tended to show that the defendant had reasonable cause to apprehend great bodily harm", March 2, 1896

Brown v. Walker, U.S Supreme Court, "The freedom of thought, of speech, and of the press; the right to bear arms", March 23, 1896

Stevenson v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "an assault upon another by means of firing a pistol at him is naturally calculated to excite some kind of passion", April 13, 1896

Alberty v. United States, U.S. Supreme Court, "he is not bound to retreat, but may use such force as is necessary to repel the assault", April 20, 1896

Wallace v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "that he procured the gun only for self-protection", April 20, 1896

Rowe v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "did the law require that the accused should stand still, and permit himself to be cut to pieces . . . We think not", Nov. 30, 1896

Robertson v. Baldwin, U.S. Supreme Court, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms (article 2) is not infringed", Jan. 25, 1897

Maxwell v. Dow, U.S. Supreme Court, "the states could not prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms", February 26, 1900

The Panama, 176 U.S. 535, U.S. Supreme Court, "Yet it must be admitted that arms and ammunition are not contraband of war", Feb. 26, 1900

John Bad Elk v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "No rule or regulation . . . has been cited, nor have we found any, which prohibits the firing of a gun there, 'for fun,' ", April 30, 1900

State of Arkansas v. Kansas & T. Coal Co., U.S. Supreme Court, "a large number of armed men of the low and lawless type of humanity", Dec. 2, 1901

Supreme Court of Idaho, IN RE BRICKEY, "but may not prohibit it", Nov. 15, 1902

Bird v. United States, U.S. Supreme Court, "whether he was under the necessity of immediately shooting and killing . . . in order to protect his own life", Nov. 17, 1902

State v. Rosenthal, "may carry a dangerous or deadly weapon, openly or concealed", May 30, 1903

Trono v. U S, "in regard to the right of trial by jury and the right of the people to bear arms", 1905

United States v. Shipp, "where a large number of men were assembled, many of them armed", May 24, 1909

Ellias v. State, “He had a legal right to carry the pistol from his residence to his store.”, March 6, 1912

Kellum v. State, “a pistol he had the legal right to carry”, May 22, 1912

Lyle v. Patterson, U.S. Supreme Court, "though it does illustrate what would be the result if possession secured by violence and maintained with force and arms", April 7, 1913

Patsone v. Com. Of Pennsylvania, U.S. Supreme Court, "The prohibition does not extend to weapons such as pistols that may be supposed to be needed occasionally for self-defense", Jan. 19, 1914

State v. Carter, "had good reason to carry the weapon in the necessary defense of his person", June 23, 1914

State v. Nieto, J. Wanamaker in dissent - “Mr. Burglar, hand me my gun.”, 1920

State v. Kerner, "To deprive him of bearing any of these arms is to infringe upon the right guaranteed to him by the Constitution.", May 11, 1921

Brown v. United States, U.S. Supreme Court, "considerable body of evidence that the shooting was in self defence", May 16, 1921

People v. Zerillo, "the right of every person to bear arms for the defense of himself", Oct. 2, 1922

Coronado Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers Of America, U.S. Supreme Court, "furnish guns and ammunition to all these men and their families", May 25, 1925

Williams v. Great Southern Lumber Co., U.S. Supreme Court, "a citizen carrying arms publicly on the street committed no offense", April 16, 1928

United States v. Schwimmer, "defense of the United States, its Constitution and laws, by armed citizens", 1929

United States v. MacIntosh, "That it is the duty of citizens by force of arms to defend our government against all enemies", 1931

Missouri Pac. R. CO. v. David, U.S. Supreme Court, "He carried a pistol and sawed-off shot gun 'for the purpose of defending himself", Feb. 15, 1932

United States v. Miller, Court Opinion & Documents By Patrick L. Aultice, May 15, 1939

Tot v.U.S./U.S. v. Delia, U.S. Supreme Court, "he was found in possession of a loaded automatic pistol", June 7, 1943

Duncan v. Kahanamoku, U.S. Supreme Court, "publish ordinances governing the conduct of the people of the Territory with respect to . . . possession of arms, ammunition, and explosives", Feb. 25, 1946

Lavender v. Kurn, United States Supreme Court, "carried a pistol to protect himself", March 25, 1946

Adamson v. People Of State Of California, U.S. Supreme Court, THIS DECISION, (Justice Black's Dissent), EXPLAINS EXACTLY WHAT WENT WRONG WITH OUR RIGHT(S), June 23, 1947

McDonald V. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "Many home-owners in this crime-beset city [Washington D.C.] doubtless are armed", Dec. 13, 1948

Griffin V. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "thereupon left the house and returned within ten minutes with a gun", April 25, 1949

Johnson v. Eisentrager, U.S. Supreme Court, "require the American Judiciary to assure them . . . right to bear arms as in the Second", 1950

Monroe v. Pape, U.S. Supreme Court, "the State that stands dumb when the lash and the torch and the pistol are lifted every night over the quiet citizen?", Feb. 20, 1961

Poe v. Ullman, U.S. Supreme Court, (Justice's Douglas, Harlan and Stewart in dissent), " This "liberty" is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property; the freedom of speech, press, and religion; the right to keep and bear arms...", June 19, 1961

Miranda v. Arizona, U.S. Supreme Court, "and who, without it, can only engage in violent self-help with guns, knives and the help of their neighbors similarly inclined", June 13, 1966

Duncan v. Louisiana, U.S. Supreme Court, "a right appertaining to each and all the people; the right to keep and to bear arms", May 20, 1968

Dyke v. Taylor Implement Co., U.S. Supreme Court, "thought he hit the back of the Dodge with one shot", May 20, 1968

Oregon v. Mitchell, U.S. Supreme Court, "generally considered by American law to be mature enough to contract, to marry, to drive an automobile, to own a gun", Dec. 21, 1970

Court of Appeals of New Mexico, "an ordinance may not deny the people the constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms", May 14, 1971

Loving v. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, "Instead, the majority repeatedly substitutes ipse dixit ["he himself said it,"/"Because I say so"] for historical evidence", June 3, 1996

Ortiz v. Commonwealth, "Because the ownership of firearms is constitutionally protected", July 18, 1996

United States of America v. Timothy Joe Emerson, "the framers saw the personal right to bear arms as a potential check against tyranny", April 7, 1999

Whether the Second Amendment Secures an Individual Right - Memorandum Opinion for the Attorney General, 2004

U.S. Court of Appeals Dist. of Columbia, "to conclude that the right in question is individual", March 9, 2007

**********

"The fact that the Founding Fathers believed devotedly that there was a God and that the UNALIENABLE RIGHTS of man were rooted in Him is clearly evidenced in their writings, from the Mayflower Compact to the Constitution itself. This background is evidenced today in our public life through the continuance in our oaths of office from the Presidency to the Alderman of the final supplication, "So help me God." . . . and the sessions of this Court are declared open by the crier in a short ceremony, the final phrase of which invokes the grace of God."

- MR. JUSTICE CLARK deliver[ing] the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court,[ABINGTON SCHOOL DIST. v. SCHEMPP, 374 U.S. 203 (1963). Page 374 U.S. 203, 212, 213] Decided June 17, 1963.

**********

"It is said, why draw the line at 18? Why not 17? Congress can draw lines, and I see no reason why it cannot conclude that 18-year-olds have that degree of maturity which entitles them to the franchise. They are

""generally considered by American law to be mature enough to contract, to marry, to drive an automobile, to own a gun, and to be responsible for criminal behavior as an adult. [Footnote 2/7]""

- MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, dissenting opinion in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Oregon v. Mitchell, 400 U.S. 112 (1970)

**********

"Principiis obsta vel Finem respice"

('Resist the beginnings or Consider the end.')

Also See:

Right to Keep and Bear Arms -

&

After The Fact

2007 GunShowOnTheNet.com