User Tools

Site Tools


documents:external:secondamendment2

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision
Previous revision
documents:external:secondamendment2 [2018/03/26 10:36] Oliver Wolcottdocuments:external:secondamendment2 [2021/02/23 16:14] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 3: Line 3:
 <WRAP round download 50%> <WRAP round download 50%>
 {{:documents:external:secondamendment2.pdf |Download:WHETHER THE SECOND AMENDMENT SECURES AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT}} {{:documents:external:secondamendment2.pdf |Download:WHETHER THE SECOND AMENDMENT SECURES AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT}}
-</WRAP> 
  
 +eBook Formats available {{ :ebook:whether_the_second_amendment_se_-_ashcroft_convention_of_states.pdf |[PDF]}}  {{ :ebook:whether_the_second_amendment_se_-_ashcroft_convention_of_states.epub |[ePub]}} {{ :ebook:whether_the_second_amendment_se_-_ashcroft_convention_of_states.mobi |[Mobi]}} 
 +</WRAP>
 +{{page>:socials}}
 **//The Second Amendment secures a right of individuals generally, not a right of States or a right restricted to persons serving in militias.//** \\  **//The Second Amendment secures a right of individuals generally, not a right of States or a right restricted to persons serving in militias.//** \\ 
 August 24, 2004 August 24, 2004
Line 351: Line 353:
  
 <blockquote> <blockquote>
-[I]t is certainly beyond human art and sophistry, to prove the British subjects, to whom the //privilege// of possessing arms is expressly recognized by the Bill of Rights, and, who live in a province where the law requires them to be equip'd with //arms//, &c. are guilty of an //illegal act//, in calling upon one another to be provided with them, as the //law directs//.((Boston Gazette, and Country Journal at 2, col. 1 (Jan. 30, 1769), //quoted in// Halbrook, //Right to Bear// at 6; //see Boston under Military Rule, 1768-1769, as Revealed in a Journal of the Times// 61 (Oliver Morton Dickerson ed., 1936) (reprinting same passage from Boston Evening Post (Apr. 3, 1769)).))  +[I]t is certainly beyond human art and sophistry, to prove the British subjects, to whom the //privilege// of possessing arms is expressly recognized by the Bill of Rights, and, who live in a province where the law requires them to be equip'd with //arms//, &c. are guilty of an //illegal act//, in calling upon one another to be provided with them, as the //law directs//.((Boston Gazette, and Country Journal at 2, col. 1 (Jan. 30, 1769), //quoted in// Halbrook, //Right to Bear// at 6; //see Boston under Military Rule, 1768-1769, as Revealed in a Journal of the Times// 61 (Oliver Morton Dickerson ed., 1936) (reprinting same passage from Boston Evening Post (Apr. 3, 1769) ).))  
 </blockquote> </blockquote>
  
documents/external/secondamendment2.txt · Last modified: 2021/02/23 16:14 by 127.0.0.1