Testimony by the Director of TBI

[Worriedman]

This is part of the testimony by the ex Chief of Police David B. Rausch from Knoxville, now Director of the TBI.  I have further testimony and it is every bit as bad and denotes the Admiration's desire to rule rather than serve.

 

Edited March 10, 2023 by Worriedman

[Worriedman]

11 minutes ago, Worriedman said:

This is part of the testimony by the ex Chief of Police David B. Rausch from Knoxville, now Director of the TBI.  I have further testimony and it is every bit as bad and denotes the Admiration's desire to rule rather than serve.

 

I don't think the Director has read the case...

“[The purpose of the Second Amendment is] to secure a well-armed militia .... But a militia would be useless unless the citizens were enabled to exercise themselves in the use of warlike weapons. To preserve this privilege, and to secure to the people the ability to oppose themselves in military force against the usurpations of government, as well as against enemies from without, that government is forbidden by any law or proceeding to invade or destroy the right to keep and bear arms .... The clause is analogous to the one securing the freedom of speech and of the press. Freedom, not license, is secured; the fair use, not the libellous abuse, is protected.” J. Pomeroy, An Introduction to the Constitutional Law of the United States 152–153 (1868) District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 618 (2008)

Before addressing the verbs “keep” and “bear,” we interpret their object: “Arms.” The 18th-century meaning is no different from the meaning today. The 1773 edition of Samuel Johnson's dictionary defined “arms” as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence.” 1 Dictionary of the English Language 106 (4th ed.) (reprinted 1978) (hereinafter Johnson). Timothy Cunningham's important 1771 legal dictionary defined “arms” as “any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands, or useth in wrath to cast at or strike another.” 1 A New and Complete Law Dictionary; see also N. Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language (1828) (reprinted 1989) (hereinafter Webster) (similar).

The term was applied, then as now, to weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity. For instance, Cunningham's legal dictionary gave as an example of usage: “Servants and labourers shall use bows and arrows on Sundays, & c. and not bear other arms.” See also, e.g., An Act for the trial of Negroes, 1797 Del. Laws ch. XLIII, § 6, in 1 First Laws of the State of Delaware 102, 104 (J. Cushing ed.1981 (pt. 1)); see generally State v. Duke, 42 Tex. 455, 458 (1874) (citing decisions of state courts construing “arms”). Although one founding-era thesaurus limited “arms” (as opposed to “weapons”) to “instruments of offence generally made use of in war,” even that source stated that all firearms constituted “arms.” 1 J. Trusler, The Distinction Between Words Esteemed Synonymous in the English Language 37 (3d ed. 1794) (emphasis added).

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844, 849, 117 S.Ct. 2329, 138 L.Ed.2d 874 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 35–36, 121 S.Ct. 2038, 150 L.Ed.2d 94 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding. District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 581-82 (2008)

 

““[O]rdinarily when called for [militia] service [able-bodied] men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.” ” District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 624 (2008)

“In the colonial and revolutionary war era, [small-arms] weapons used by militiamen and weapons used in defense of person and home were one and the same.” State v. Kessler,289 Ore. 359, 368, 614 P.2d 94, 98 (1980) (citing G. Neumann, Swords and Blades of the American Revolution 6–15, 252–254 (1973)) District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 624-25 (2008)

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M–16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment's ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 627 (2008)
 

[leroy]

Rausch is neither a lawyer, a good police chief, a scholar, nor a student of the Second Amendment... He is, however, a boot licking opportunist, hoisted on us all via the Haslam Enterprise. 

David Rausch's only discernable talent ( . To me, at least .) is being bought n paid for by Bill Haslam and rewarded a KPD chief's job; and later with the directorship of the TBI. 

He is in the same class as McNally; only a bit below, as he was never elected to any office.  He is, however, very adept at bootlicking n saying "Yousah Boss"... The citizens of the State of Tennessee deserve far better than this " civil servant "...

despisin leroy... Watcher of the foxes in the henhouse...

[CMDRStormBorn]

“Ahm with you fellers”… Seriously amen to what Leroy said.

[Sunfish]

The Gruppen Fuhrer's and the brown shirts or should I say brown nosers.

[Defender]

This crappola pisses me off.  They work so hard to make it so damn confusing and restrictive. Just have the law read don’t commit criminal acts with or without  guns.

[Worriedman]

It has been all I could do to keep from putting up a meme about Benedict Arnold having been in the Army...