Second Amendment Today (courtesy foxnews.com)

“The courts have consistently determined that the Second Amendment does not ensure each individual the right to bear arms. The courts have never found a law regulating the private ownership of weapons unconstitutional . . . This means that the rights of this amendment are not extended to the individual citizens of the states. So a person has no right to complain about a Second Amendment violation by state laws.” Northeast Middle School’s The Second Amendment Today worksheet [via foxnews.com]

58 Responses to Quote of the Day: Connecticut Social Studies Edition

    • They only count when their rulings agree with the grabbers’ agenda.

      And, just sayin’, we’re often guilty of the same thing.

  1. Do we think the grabbers would conveniently ignore Heller if they had won? Hell no, it would be in our face.

  2. Too bad there is a complicit press instead of a watchdog press. We need to fill that roll. How do we contact these jokers and straighten them out?

  3. From the linked article: “….’It is no longer an assignment in that particular school,’ she said”

    What about all the other schools?

    This is not going to end well. For anyone.

  4. I guess they don’t understand “the people”. Otherwise the other protected rights that mention “the people” are collective rights also. Imagine the 4A as a collective right? Yeah, it doesn’t work.

  5. um, has someone pointed out that the Connecticut constitution says:

    SEC. 15. Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.

    http://www.cslib.org/constitutionalamends/constitution.htm

    and this was cited I believe in the Heller decision, since the CT constitution was written around the same time as the US constitution.

    What I really want to know is how all this gun ban legislation in CT makes it through the CT courts … Does the CT courts just not protect rights guaranteed by its own constitution?

    • With our courts in this state, it is entirely possible that they would vacate Article I, Section 15.

      Which is why litigation is always such a risky strategy. We need to replace all the legislators that voted for this abomination in 2014 and get it repealed.

      • and eventually the judges who do not respect the constitution of the state.

        But yes, we cannot defend ourselves in our own courts because the judges would somehow rule that SEC 15 is not valid. It is that bad. The supreme court of CT is full retard/libtard and so biased that there is no beam scale in the world that could actually tilt the CT courts to even neutral.

      • Brian,

        You can’t just simply vacate state constitution articles. This is where the next fight is headed; the Courts. If the Supremes are not willing to extend the protection they gave handguns to the AR15, we will have a massive acceleration in the split of this great country. Everybody made fun of the Russian Professor who predicted the breakup of the U.S. back in 2008:

        http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

        You better start believing him now. This is what all of these laws are going to lead to if the Supremes don’t knock some sense into these idiotic legislators.

    • The courts cannot act until such legislation is passed; they might actually overturn many of those laws.

  6. Blatant disregard for our founding principles is what we’re up against.

    THERE.CAN.BE.NO.COMPROMISE.

    NONE.

  7. It’s the Northeast. While the worksheet is wrong factually, its culturally accurate. With some exceptions, the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to New England residents. I don’t say that to offend anyone, but don’t tell me a New Jersey or Conneticutt resident has anything but a government regulated privlidge to keep-definitely not bear- a firearm.

  8. sieg heil!!!!!!!!!!!! all hail victory in revisionist history!

    They start in the schools once brainwashed there is no hope.
    Rob Drummond
    Hillsboro, NH

  9. This kind of stuff is why I struggle with allowing my daughter to go to public school. We’re allowing these D-bags to shape our youth, and I may, in fact, abstain from the process. My little girls mind is too valuable.

    Too, she would no doubt make a pistol out of legos and get suspended anyway…

  10. This is one area that liberals have been consistently WIPING THE FLOOR with conservatives for as long as I can remember: revisionist history. If you put it in a book, or say it like everyone KNOWS it’s true, then it must be. It’s a crying shame that we allow this type of thing to happen. I was glad to read the parent’s reaction. He was apparently furious (thankfully) and demanded meetings with the principal and the BOE. That’s exactly what I would do if it were my child. Right before I sued the school district and the teacher.

  11. What about other civil rights, they must be worthless too. Their steven slater school of psychology is really impressive, maybe a bit emotional though. Yes, you can’t shout intelligence & understanding into the clowns head at the drive through, Randy

  12. Absolutely disgusting…

    I have an idea: how about all these people who hate the Constitution just move to North Korea and leave us alone? I’m sure they never have gun violence there and the government makes every decision for you, just like Obama and Biden are envisioning!

  13. DC vs Heller 554 US 570 (2008) — SCOTUS establishes 2nd Amend as protecting an individual right
    McDonald vs Chicago 561 US 3025 (2010) — SCOTUS incorporates 2nd Amend against the states

  14. It’s a 10-year old worksheet that predates the Heller and McDonald decisions. Here’s what the current owner of Instructional Fair has posted on their web site:

    “There have been recent questions in the media regarding the book The Bill of Rights in Today’s World originally published by Instructional Fair.

    Please note: Carson-Dellosa did not print, publish or distribute the title in question. This book was discontinued over 10 years ago, 6 years prior to our acquisition of Instructional Fair. “

    • The current owner of the publisher may not be culpable, but it was a lie even when it was printed ten years ago. And when it was printed is a red herring anyway. The teacher (perhaps district?) was apparently using this material quite recently.

      • Certainly the school and the teacher bear responsibility. But I’m as included to ascribe this to incompetence and inertia as I am to malice. The teacher or school may have been copying that workbook over and over for 20 years.

        • I see what you’re saying. I’d accept the incompetence defence if that’s what the teacher and district come back with.

    • Wow.

      Real teachers don’t rely on worksheets.

      Working with students without relying on worksheets? That’s called… TEACHING. Copy machines get abused too much by modern teachers. A sheet paper is no substitute for meaningful instruction and student interaction with the material in my opinion.

      And yeah, I’m a teacher.

  15. So that 2008 case meant nothing? Moral of the story: Homeschool your children or face their indocrination…

      • Right, it’s out there, and the publisher shouldn’t be held responsible at this point. The teacher who assigned it, and possibly the administration who approved it, however…

        • Who’da thunk that you might have to update your teaching materials from time to time when you’re teaching about a “living document”?

  16. When I was in High School (in CT mind you) we watched Michael Moore in history class. That should explain alot.

  17. I am trying to find the author who wrote the worksheet for Instructional Fair inc.
    Anybody find the author?

  18. To play devil’s advocate here, there is a bit of truth in this from the original intent standpoint. The FEDERAL government (read: now national) was simply a FEDERATION of the states. The “Bill of Rights” (which some viewed as superfluous at the time) was meant to limit the powers of the FEDERAL government, not the states. In fact, early Supreme Court cases established this to be the case. The states were free to do that which they wished. It was the responsibility of the people of those states to ensure that their state governments didn’t encroach upon their rights, not the federal government to play nanny. Just because the federal government couldn’t do it didn’t mean the states couldn’t.

    Fast forward 100 years and the NATIONAL government started slowly taking hold. Incorporation is a double-edged sword when it comes to this new form of government, especially with the turn toward democracy rather than a republic. The simple fact that firearms laws are up for debate in the legislative branch means it’s no longer protected as it was intended.

    If you want to stop the gun debate on the national level, you need to start at your local level. We need to get back to the separation of powers between state and federal entities. It’s the only way to get things back to where they need to be without hitting the reset button…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *