Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Second Amendment Was Never Meant to Protect an Individual’s Right to a Gun [View all]valerief
(53,235 posts)1. And the 1st amendment was never meant to give corporations speech=money rights.
http://money.howstuffworks.com/corporation-person1.htm
And we know what Justice Roberts' court did with free speech.
Since corporations had been viewed as artificial persons for millennia, the debate over whether they should be afforded the same rights as humans had been raging long before the 14th Amendment was adopted. Thomas Jefferson had suggested explicit language to govern corporate entities, like requiring maximum life spans, be put into the Constitution. His stipulations didn't make the cut, however. And once the 14th Amendment was created, the Constitution actually expanded -- rather than limited -- the scope of corporations' power.
In the case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, the Supreme Court decided that only the state that charters a corporation can tax it. This decision upheld the long-standing custom in America of state governance of corporations. It's the state that grants a corporation its charter -- its license to do business -- and it's up to the state to tax and regulate the corporation.
But a note written by the court reporter at the heading of the decision went further than that. Although another, private note from the Chief Justice said that the court had purposely avoided the issue of Constitutional corporate protection, the reporter chose to make his own addition to the records. He noted that the court had decided that corporations are persons under the 14th Amendment, and as such are subject to the same protections under the law as anyone else.
But a note written by the court reporter at the heading of the decision went further than that. Although another, private note from the Chief Justice said that the court had purposely avoided the issue of Constitutional corporate protection, the reporter chose to make his own addition to the records. He noted that the court had decided that corporations are persons under the 14th Amendment, and as such are subject to the same protections under the law as anyone else.
And we know what Justice Roberts' court did with free speech.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
82 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

The Second Amendment Was Never Meant to Protect an Individual’s Right to a Gun [View all]
yallerdawg
Dec 2015
OP
And the 1st amendment was never meant to give corporations speech=money rights.
valerief
Dec 2015
#1
If a conservative administration decided that Democratic Underground, LLC had no 1A rights...
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2015
#38
So the folks who intended a collective right went back to their respective states..
X_Digger
Dec 2015
#3
Umm, no. The right exists, everywhere. That doesn't make any restriction impossible.
X_Digger
Dec 2015
#11
Being necessary to the security of a free State. How secure is a free state with armed nut jobs? nt
Xipe Totec
Dec 2015
#4
No, this is a fundamental aspect of our government that you seem to have missed.
X_Digger
Dec 2015
#25
Give it up X_Digger, some people just don't get it or are intentionally obtuse. eom.
GGJohn
Dec 2015
#43
Apparently so. I have a bruise on my forehead from pounding it on my desk. n/t
X_Digger
Dec 2015
#45
How about this...the bill of rights is a set of instructions from the governed to the governors tha
Augiedog
Dec 2015
#48
The bill of rights was promised to the states even though promulgated at a later date. No bill of
Augiedog
Dec 2015
#70
I agree totally, thus my contention that the second amendment first must be recognized for what it
Augiedog
Dec 2015
#72
I'm sad you missed my point. If it helps, please ignore that last sentence. Better yet, ignore me.
Augiedog
Dec 2015
#75
Any perfunctory reading of post revolutionary history will provide the context in which the bill of
Augiedog
Dec 2015
#81
Is that what you call a general lack of understanding of the pertinent subject matter...
beevul
Dec 2015
#26
The militia is/was not the people...it excluded women, slaves and anyone who had self worth of less
Augiedog
Dec 2015
#44
"The Second Amendment Was Never Meant to Protect an Individual’s Right to a Gun"
EX500rider
Dec 2015
#17
Ah - the 2nd IS only for militia purposes? So we can buy M16s and M4s and M9 now?
jmg257
Dec 2015
#27
"The #2 Amend now THREATENS the security of a free state." Then stop complaining and get it repealed
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2015
#41
Can you find a graphic that shows suicide and homicide rates that include all methods?
pediatricmedic
Dec 2015
#51
To anyone who believes the 2A doesn't protect an individual right to possess firearms,
branford
Dec 2015
#60