http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/po...t-someone.html one of those dumb rulings. Best not to rely on the police to protect you.
Last edited by Ghostpanther; 2016-05-21 at 11:53 PM.
Very good question and one which to myself, shows the 2nd amendment was not just about a militia. If anything, logic should tell us a person handicapped in a wheel chair, but otherwise able to hold and fire a handgun for example, should for sure be allowed to have one for self defense.
I need to become an NRA member because the globalists will never end their war on freedoms and it takes a powerful organization of grass roots citizens to fight back against their evil plans.
A dictatorship fear was not the reason for the 2nd amendment in my opinion. There are too many checks and balances to make sure that does not happen here. Which now for over 200 years, has not. :P The militia was mainly a way to mobilize a resistance to a foreign invasion or a native American raid/uprising. Today the National Guard fulfills that need and more.
yes, but you just said that the checks and balances exerted a magic liberal influence?
- - - Updated - - -
Get me your quote then.
But you were the one who thought that the states in the amendment was referring to the US.
- - - Updated - - -
No, i didn't.
I said that to guard against tyranny was one reason for it existing.
And equally shocking is that a Democrat wants to put tighter gun control laws in place when it has been proven to not work in the US. Take a look at Chicago and Detroit. Both cities have been run by Democrats for decades. Have the tightest gun restrictions, yet have the most gun related crime. Why?? Because criminals don't follow the law...
Democrats are supported by criminals, they feel they in turn must support them, right?
All I know is if its Hillary or Trump, I'm going Trump. But if its Trump and anyone other than Hillary, I will for for the other.
I hate players that suck at WoW, But I also hate wanna be elitist who barely down normal raid and said that the game is too easy...... yea show me you mythic achivement before you say its too easy otherwise move along scum, because I heard wildstar need you.
Guess I will have to explain to you, seeing as you are incapable of seeing the politicizing of the Constitution. The GOP and Conservatives decided that they were going after the gun wielders vote by pandering to the NRA, and Conservative judges have followed along. It was not always this way.
In the Balance: Law and Politics on the Roberts Court
By Mark Tushnet
https://books.google.com/books?id=3R...ing%5D&f=falseThe Dictionary of Misinformation, published in 1975, asserted confidently: "Nothing in the Constitution...forbids the right of federal or state governments to make any gun-control laws they wish in terms of an individual who is not a member of a 'well-regulated militia' " in November 1991, Robert Bork said that "the National Rifle Association is always arguing that the Second Amendment determines the right to bear arms. But I think it really is the peoples' right to bear arms in a militia. The NRA thinks that it protects their right to have Teflon coated bullets. But that's not the original understanding." A month later, retired Chief Justice Warren Burger, hardly a flaming liberal, repeated on the Mac-Neil/Lehrer NewsHour some ideas he had published two years earlier, though in more heated terms, saying that the NRA had perpetuated "one of the greatest pieces of fraud" and "misled the American people" into thinking that the Second Amendment had anything to do with an individual's right to own guns outside the militia setting.
In the 1990s Robert Bork was an icon for Conservative legal thinkers. Warren Burger was a conventional conservative Republican throughout his career. But by the 1990s the party had left them both behind, at least on the issue of the Second Amenedment. The Republican Party had adopted the NRA's "fradulent" claim that the Second Amendment protected every individuals right to own guns. Gun rights advocates developed what they cleverly labeled the "Standard Model" of the Second Amendment's original meaning. Their originalism triumphed in 2008 when Justice Antonin Scalia wrote what legal academics accurately described as the most thoroughly originalist opinion in modern times, striking down the District of Columbia's complete ban on gun possession in the city.
Also of note is the fact that the NRA was originally, for most of its' first 100 years, strictly a sport hunting organization. An NRA "fact book" published in 1975 stated that the Second Amendment was "of limited practical utility" for ordinary gun control debates. The NRA then discovered they could greatly grow their membership by changing stances on everything they had previously stood for, simply by catering to gun advocates.
The simple fact is, the only reason guns have not been banned is due to the political shenanigans of the GOP and the NRA.
- - - Updated - - -
Because one can't simply drive outside those cities to purchase a gun, right? Guns would have to be abolished nation-wide, in order for it to work.