McDonald v. Chicago: An Exclusive Heritage Foundation Interview


Following the Supreme Court’s decision in McDonald v. Chicago, the Heritage interviewed the lead attorney Alan Gura, the plaintiff Otis McDonald and Second Amendment Foundation President Alan Gottlieb about the ramifications this case will have for the Second Amendment throughout the country.

Tags: , , , , ,

25 Responses to “McDonald v. Chicago: An Exclusive Heritage Foundation Interview”

  1. mallardhead says:

    @Cstrife234
    LOL! I was full of malice and pride, religious and national, but a single circumstance made me throw out the church and the govt. I’ve been rebuilding my life ever since, trusting neither to tell the truth. ..So you know the significance of ‘son of man’? ..and ..Have you seen the beer commercial that makes the founding fathers look like ‘good old boys’?

  2. Cstrife234 says:

    @mallardhead I meant the ones we really think about, but you’re right. I believe Jesus to have been a man as well. He claims over and over to be the son of man. I’m glad to see a knowledgeable person without malice or pride.

  3. mallardhead says:

    @Cstrife234
    Only 9 of the 56 who signed the Declaration and about 19 of the 55 who signed the Constitution were Freemasons. Most were not. ..Most were ‘improper’ Christians, bound by the Bible but free thinking on the Word and unbound by doctrine/dogma. .. Common Law was their focus, more than anything else. .. Jefferson stripped what he considered Myth from Jesus the Man and devoted himself to Him. ..Look forward to the link..

  4. Cstrife234 says:

    @mallardhead Well, the founding fathers were freemasons. That’s obvious in so many ways. A lot of the constitution itself was based off of law in Deuteronomy, established in common law, and documents like the magna carta. The creator, or divine architect is whatever you consider it to be, personally. To some people, that’s nature itself (aka natural rights). Either way, we’re given rights by creation and not by government, or paper. If I can i’ll link you to a site about restoring the republic.

  5. mallardhead says:

    @Cstrife234
    That’s what’s supposed to be. The FedGovt has been intruding on that from the start, more so in the last 100 years. .. as they have been withering away the ‘God’ concept.. So WHY do We have to sue for those rights now? .. Something is wrong and We do need to fix it. .. Got a plan for a fix and restoration of the Republic?

  6. Cstrife234 says:

    @mallardhead Basically, states are republics of sovereign individuals. On the Illinois Seal from 1818 “State Sovereignty, National Union”. We are not subjects, voluntary or involuntary to the Federal Government Corporation. We are sovereigns by the grace of our creator (god,architect,nature, etc). Our rights are not given by, but enumerated in the Bill of Rights and Constitution and its high time we take the republic back. People, learn about your rights to assemble grand jury (26).

  7. mallardhead says:

    @Cstrife234
    Lol at your patient, “Well yeah…” ..I KNOW all that quite well! ..I don’t KNOW why ‘automatic American rights’ had to go before the court. .. (I do, really! The Hundred + Years Mollification of the Nation by those who’d end such rights. I’m just angry!) .. I understand our structure but will never equate it (a Republic) to the UK (a modified parliamentarian/monarchy) or the EU ( a modified dictatorship) because of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

  8. Cstrife234 says:

    @Cstrife234 American citizens.” This would ensure that all people, not just free non-indentured whites would be citizens born in right, not privledge. That would make sure the 2nd amendment applies to all men/women in the US. Not just for self-defense in the home, but legal to carry (bear arms) to defend ourselves and eachother from criminals and enemies foreign and domestic.

  9. Cstrife234 says:

    @mallardhead Well yeah, the founding fathers made the bill of rights and the constitution and likewise they were sent to the colonies/states for the people, because it does state that the 9th and 10th assert personal sovereignty being born in the republic of their state and because of that they are automatically Americans by right. Think of each state as its own country in a union of states (United States), as the countries in the United Kingdom are. Or the European Union with its members.

  10. Cstrife234 says:

    I would say this is a win, but it’s only half of the battle. The other half is that he’s only allowed to assert his “right” under the 14th Amendment, because if you have any adhesion contracts with the government, you’re not a sovereign citizen in right, but in privledge as guaranteed by the 14th. That stupid amendment also accounts for blacks and any minorities. It should be re-written like, “All men and women born in a State are citizens of that state and by the 9th and 10th are considered

  11. mallardhead says:

    The Bill of Rights is certainly a part of the FedGovt, but its there because it reflects Rights demanded by the People of that Govt. Those same People populate the states, cities and everywhere. Common Sense says it applies there as well. Good job!

  12. DavyCrockett2 says:

    @wynboniface

    Amen to that!

  13. DavyCrockett2 says:

    ****6/28/2010**** The Supreme Court of The USA’s decision:

    THE 2ND AMENDMENT APPLIES TO ALL!! Gun bans are now illegal!!

    It seems we have one section of government reading The Constitution. Are they passing copies along to the ‘president’ and Congress?

    EAT MY SHIT LIBERALS!! I mean, line up and let me shit in your mouth!!

    Fuck you too Obama!

    FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!! 

  14. edavismookie25 says:

    @MotionFrequency AMEN! AMEN!

  15. edavismookie25 says:

    @SWATsnip3r It’s on its way!

  16. edavismookie25 says:

    @nthamix Amen. We have to take our government back.

  17. wynboniface says:

    Go kill the NFA 34, GCA 68, FOPA 86, and the import bans!

  18. jonilsen351 says:

    Yes! I am so pleased words can’t describe it. Now, don’t forget to vote! Gun ownership goes up, crime goes down. Proven fact. Gun control isn’t about guns it’s about control. Gun control is life insurance for those scheming to steal the rest of our bill of rights.

  19. pat97vette says:

    “Maryland Shall Issue” needs you!

  20. nthamix says:

    There is a God…

  21. screwopenborders says:

    @SWATsnip3r It applies to NY too.

  22. truckindawg1 says:

    GOD BLESS OTIS MCDONALD AND EVERYONE ELSE WHO MADE THIS RULING POSSIBLE !!!!!!!!!
    Finally ( whenever this takes effect ) we in California can finally tell counties like Santa Cruz county that I demand my ccw permit!!!
    One of the most limp wristed counties in California. I’ll take my permit now please mr sheriff !!!!

  23. penguinistas says:

    Thank you Mr McDonald for standing up to the Chicago political machine to take back your rights. Mayors banning guns from the insulated safety of their walled mansions really don’t care about the little people they pretend to serve.

  24. SWATsnip3r says:

    COME TO NY!!!

  25. MotionFrequency says:

    The ones that want to take your guns away are the ones that want to enslave everyone and the world. They are terrified of the people, the little ones, they love to step on and use us like a kleenex. Liberals love big government, dependence on government for everything in your life, security, health, food, checks and they basically want to control. If you have a weapon and say no, they have a problem with that because you are standing up to them. How dare you stand, your a regular person.

Leave a Reply