Ejecting a few Constitutional 9mm Casings
Submitted by Jeff Buster on Tue, 06/29/2010 - 16:42.
 The argument is that the right to bear arms came with the constitution - and the 14th amendment. As weapons become smaller, lighter, more potent (this image isn't of a flintlock) are we getting ahead of what the constitutional framers had in mind?
Personally, I would extend the NRA arguments to automatic grenade launchers and surface to air missles. Then I would feel protected.
( categories: )
|
The argument is that the right to bear arms came with the constitution - and the 14th amendment. As weapons become smaller, lighter, more potent (this image isn't of a flintlock) are we getting ahead of what the constitutional framers had in mind?
Printer-friendly version
put down that muskat
and get your 45 or surface to air missiles, or really anything you'd freaking like. The Supremes say it is ok.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Hmm, words that warm the cockles of the patriots and their militias.
And has the concealed carry law protected anyone? Now the bright ones in Columbus want to extend this carry permit to include bars. Alcohol and guns; yep, makes lots of sense, not. One more step away from becoming a civilized nation.
hear you on the double-edgeness of the second amendment
but really didn't Congress dispense with that pesky US Constitution and due process in October 2001 when they passed the US Patriot Act?
likely would be unpopular to have immediately closed all the courthouses and announced that NOW the Legislative and Executive branches can take one's property, family and life with NO due process.
really seems that the judiciary is continuing at the discretion of the other two branches, regardless of what the Supremes think, say or write.