Gun Control is Racist- Full Auto Show

https://youtu.be/lH4SjiWEVcE

The KKK-Enabling Act of 1878, aka the U.S. v. Cruikshank Supreme Court Decision
Blast from the Past Bump

SPONSOR

If you like this content, be sure you click here and support iState's ability to deliver to you news for the iStater, the state of one.

http://www.shmoop.com/right-to-bear-arms/timeline.html

May 8, 1792

The United States Congress passes the Uniform Militia Act, requiring all free white men between the ages of 18 and 45 to enroll in their state militias.

The United States Congress passes the Uniform Militia Act, requiring all free white men between the ages of 18 and 45 to enroll in their state militias.

Nov 1871

The National Rifle Association is founded by William Conant Church and George Wood Wingate. Disappointed by the gun skills of the men they had commanded during the Civil War, the two former Union officers establish the NRA to promote better marksmanship. During its first decades, the NRA builds rifle ranges, sponsors shooting competitions, and organizes gun safety courses.

The National Rifle Association is founded by William Conant Church and George Wood Wingate. Disappointed by the gun skills of the men they had commanded during the Civil War, the two former Union officers establish the NRA to promote better marksmanship. During its first decades, the NRA builds rifle ranges, sponsors shooting competitions, and organizes gun safety courses.

Apr 12, 1873

In Colfax, Louisiana, roughly 100 persons, most of them members of a black militia, are killed by a white gang which includes many members of the Ku Klux Klan. The trials for the gang members responsible for the “Colfax County Massacre” will culminate in U.S. v. Cruikshank.

 

In Colfax, Louisiana, roughly 100 persons, most of them members of a black militia, are killed by a white gang which includes many members of the Ku Klux Klan. The trials for the gang members responsible for the “Colfax County Massacre” will culminate in U.S. v. Cruikshank.
On Easter Sunday, April 13, 1873, an armed white militia attacked African-American Republican freedmen, who had gathered at the Grant Parish courthouse in Colfax, Louisiana to protect it from the pending Democratic takeover. Although some of the black people were armed and initially defended themselves, estimates were that 100–280 were killed, most of them following surrender, including 50 being held prisoner that night. Three white people were killed. This was in the tense aftermath of months of uncertainty following the disputed gubernatorial election of November 1872, when two parties declared victory at the state and local levels. The election was still unsettled in the spring, and both Republican and Fusionists, who carried Democratic backing, had certified their own slates for the local offices of sheriff (Christopher Columbus Nash) and justice of the peace in Grant Parish, where Colfax is the parish seat. Federal troops reinforced the election of the Republican governor, William Pitt Kellogg.

Some members of the white mob were indicted and charged under the Enforcement Act of 1870. The Act had been designed primarily to allow Federal enforcement and prosecution of actions of the Ku Klux Klan and other secret vigilante groups in preventing black people from voting and murdering them. Among other provisions, the law made it a felony for two or more people to conspire to deprive anyone of his constitutional rights.[5] The white defendants were charged with sixteen counts, divided into two sets of eight each. Among the charges included violating the freedmen’s rights to lawfully assemble, to vote, and to bear arms.[6]

Mar 27, 1876

The United States Supreme Court, in U.S. v. Cruikshank, rules that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to keep and bear arms; it only protects the states’ rights to maintain militias.

The United States Supreme Court, in U.S. v. Cruikshank, rules that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to keep and bear arms; it only protects the states’ rights to maintain militias.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Cruikshank

 

United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)[1] was an important United States Supreme Court decision in United States constitutional law, one of the earliest to deal with the application of the Bill of Rights to state governments following the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The case arose during the Reconstruction Era from the 1872 Louisiana gubernatorial election which was hotly disputed, and led to both major political parties certifying their slates of local officers. At Colfax, Louisiana, tensions climaxed in the Colfax massacre, in which 105 black people and 3 white people were killed. A federal judge ruled that the Republican-majority legislature be seated, but the Democrats did not accept this. Growing social tensions erupted on April 13, 1873, when an armed militia of white Democrats attacked black Republican freedmen, who had gathered at the Grant Parish Courthouse in Colfax, Louisiana, to resist an attempt of Democratic takeover of the offices.[2]

Federal charges were brought against several members of the white insurgents under the Enforcement Act of 1870, which prohibited two or more people from conspiring to deprive anyone of their constitutional rights. Convictions were appealed to the Supreme Court. Among these charges including hindering the freedmen’s First Amendment right to freely assemble and their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. In its ruling, the Supreme Court overturned the convictions of the white men, holding that the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies only to state action, not to actions by individual citizens. It said that the plaintiffs had to rely on state courts for protection, although at the time and for decades after these courts never convicted white men for murder of blacks.[3] The Justices ruled that the Second Amendment only restricts the power of the national government in taking away rights and that the right to “keep and bear arms for a lawful purpose” exists apart from the Constitution, not because of it, stating “This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence”.[4]

Federal troops were withdrawn from the South in 1877, and elections afterward were often fraught with fraud and violence as white Democrats struggled to suppress black Republican voting. From 1890 to 1908, the southern states passed new constitutions or amendments that resulted in disfranchisement of most black people and many poor whites, to prevent the type of Populist coalition that had gained temporary power in the 1880s. This status of political exclusion lasted until after passage of federal civil rights legislation in the 1960s.

Majority opinion[edit]

The Supreme Court ruled on March 27, 1876, on a range of issues and found the indictment faulty. It overturned the convictions of the white defendants in the case. Chief Justice Morrison Waite authored the majority opinion.

In its ruling, the Court did not incorporate the Bill of Rights to the states. The Court opined about the dualistic nature of the U.S. political system:

There is in our political system a government of each of the several States, and a Government of the United States. Each is distinct from the others, and has citizens of its own who owe it allegiance, and whose rights, within its jurisdiction, it must protect. The same person may be at the same time a citizen of the United States and a citizen of a State, but his rights of citizenship under one of those governments will be different from those he has under the other.[7]

The ruling also stated that all U.S. citizens are subject to two governments, their state government and the other the national government, and then defined the scope of each:

The Government of the United States, although it is, within the scope of its powers, supreme and beyond the States, can neither grant nor secure to its citizens rights or privileges which are not expressly or by implication placed under its jurisdiction. All that cannot be so granted or secured are left to the exclusive protection of the States.[8]

In addition the Justices held that the Second Amendment restricts only the powers of the national government, and that it does not restrict private citizens from denying other citizens the right to keep and bear arms, or any other right in the Bill of Rights. The Justices held that the right of the people to keep and bear arms exists, and that it is a right that exists without the Constitution granting such a right, by stating “Neither is it [the right to keep and bear arms] in any manner dependent upon that instrument [the Constitution] for its existence.” Their ruling was that citizens must look to “municipal legislation” when other citizens deprive them of such rights rather than the Constitution.

A Court Ruling that doesn’t suck

http://patch.com/connecticut/newtown/judge-dismisses-lawsuit-brought-families-sandy-hook-victims-against-rifle-maker

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by the families of the Sandy Hook victims against Remington Arms, the maker of the rifle used in the elementary school shooting that left 20 children and six educators dead.

In dismissing the lawsuit, Judge Barbara Bellis wrote in her decision that “Congress, through the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), has broadly prohibited lawsuits ‘against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms…for the harm solely caused by the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearm products…by others when the product functioned as designed and intended.”

The lawsuit was filed against Remington, distributor Camfour Inc. and gun shop Riverview Sales that sold the gun. Riverview applied for Chapter 7 bankruptcy over the summer.

The suit was originally filed in state court and was sent to federal court before being remanded back to state court.

Law firm Koskoff, Koskoff and Bieder argued that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle shouldn’t have been released to the public and belongs only in the hands of military and law enforcement personnel.

“While the families are obviously disappointed with the judge’s decision, this is not the end of the fight,” Josh Koskoff from Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder, one of the lawyers representing the families, said of the decision. “We will appeal this decision immediately and continue our work to help prevent the next Sandy Hook from happening.”

Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy issued the following statement:

“While today is a deeply disappointing day for the families, their appeal will continue this fight for justice. As I have stated before, the laws providing unique protections to gun manufacturers need to be changed to give crime victims a right to pursue legal remedies.”.

Facebook Comments
About Paul Gordon 1358 Articles

Paul Gordon is the publisher and editor of iState.TV. He has published and edited newspapers, poetry magazines and online weekly magazines.
He is the director of Social Cognito, an SEO/Web Marketing Company. You can reach Paul at pg@istate.tv

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*