So apparently,
the Supreme Court has hinted that they would be willing to look at laws that have been enacted on the State and City level that limit what firearms can be owned, to see if they are against the Second Amendment of the Consitiution. Given the makeup of the Court, this isn't really too suprising
(
Read more... )
Comments 10
I was more than a little freaked to see people with sidearms at Obama speeches last year. With these guys interpreting the Constitution, I'm ready for them to bring back indentured servants at the first gasp.
Don't get me started on the legal fiction that corporations are individuals within the law.
Reply
I do wonder about the second amendment sometimes, and what it's protecting. It was put in place when the reigning governement, and the soldiers of its army, were basically a foreign power. But your local National Guard is made up of your neighbors. All dystopian angst aside, I have to believe that, if all normal systems of redress had truly collapsed to the point that law-abiding suburban americans were really ready to take up arms on a scale that could overthrow the government, a fair chunk of the military would have already defected and gone home to join them.
The other thing being, are you fighting for your right to own stealth detection hardware and bunker-busting-missle countermeasures for your house/compound? Because that's how the government puts down insurgency now...
Reply
same views on this subject. I have never joined the NRA,
but I have to say that if it didn't exist, I would feel moved
to create it.
Reply
Reply
I have a few targets that I'd like to shoot at ;-)
lol
Reply
Reply
And odds are, it would only be one state, one county.
Unless they heard that I was coming and fled from Manhattan.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment