Now Barack can focus on fixing the economy, ending the war, establishing a health care system that works, and encouraging alternate energy solutions rather than pandering to or pursuing gun control for all the delusional, limpdicked, wussypant faggots who ain't got a fuck'n clue.

Maybe you didn't read the decision but Justice Scalia said it is perfectly legal to impose conditions, qualifications and prohibitions on certain classes of weapons so gun control will continue to be an issue.

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:  For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."

but even I have no problems with common sense regulation of firearms. Only a moron would want Uzi's with armor piercing ammo available to every gang banger that wanted one.

Most of those trying to "regulate" guns however don't really want common sense regualation. They want the outright confiscation of all firearms period. Their goal is to gradually, one law at a time, one community at a time erode the second ammendment until the outright bannishment of all privately held firearms is accomplished. This Supreme Court ruling sets those antigunners back decades.  Thank you Supreme Court.

But a politician seeking office is not as likely to cozy up to a bunch of pacifist loons by championing a ridiculously restrictive gun control measure. And just as the Anti gun zealots will continue to work for their cause the Pro Second Amendment zealots will have the strength of the Supreme Court's decision to vindicate theirs.  



-- Modified on 6/26/2008 4:41:03 PM

Yep the NRA will go after the places in Illnois where Obama advocated that a man cannot  have a handgun in his own home to protect himself

my initial hunch is that many folks hailing this decision may come to feel differently some years down the line.  50 states, 50 different sets of laws.  Do not be surprised if owning firearms becomes in many states, including some not currently imposing much in the way of restriction, similar to owning an automobile -- mandatory liscensing, registration, insurance, restrictions on the types of firearms and ammo owned, crazy user fees, dedicated taxes, etc...  A lot of which is good and common sensical, as anyone who wants to own firearms ought to have some minimal training and a basic understanding of safety-related issues involving their proper use.  And the NRA, whose political stance is generally what repels most of it's critics, is excellent at promoting safety education among it's members.

I think fast-foward to 2033, and today's gun controllers will be quite contend with the practical way this decision plays out over time.

regulations I will support. Not necessarily to limit our rights but to prevent it's abuse. I sure as hell do not want ANYONE, having in possession a FIM-92 Stinger anti-aircraft or an M-50 sniper weapon, except the US Armed Forces.

-- Modified on 6/26/2008 7:48:35 PM

We need more like him to slap back the intrusive nannystate bitchninnies on the left who chafe at the though somone might want to live differently than they do.

I'll keep one racked for MasterbaterGinsberger.

I'm just curious if any conservatives who oppose the concept of judicial activism have a problem with this ruling that creates a right to bear arms for private use, such as self-defense, even though that right is nowhere in the Constitution.  Doesn't this amount to Scalia and the four dwarves  legislating from the bench?

You need to go ahead and change your alias to KeithieO

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Obviously, we have a difference of opinion. I do not see judicial activism in today's US Supreme Court ruling. The District of Columbia was banning firearms in their jurisdication. The Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional because banning of firearms infringed upon the right of the people to bear arms.

To state "right to bear arms for private use is nowhere in the constitution" is a hollow argument. The US Constitution my friend is only 4400 words long it would be impossible for the framers of this document to have to outline all the details i.e. the disgreements, opinions, the challenges of people and all the permutations of living.

That is why it is in my opinion why the founders of our country most notably Gen. George Washington were depending on the Holy Scriptures and his Holy Providence to provide us with a moral code. If our moral code would ever decay with the government abusing their powers. The Framers provided us with an option in the constitution and that is to take up arms for the security of our freedoms.

I have no problem with reasonable and common sense oversight to our rights. Unlimited rights would most likely result in abuse. I do not want my neighbor who may be unstable to acquire a Stinger anti-aircraft missile weapon. That would be great for Raytheon and their stockholders but probably bad for aviation.  

It would also be great in respect to holding a government that has lost touch and chosen to ignore its citizens at bay.

"If our moral code would ever decay with the government abusing their powers. The Framers provided us with an option in the constitution and that is to take up arms for the security of our freedoms."

Many anti-gun liberals have argued it is folly to think that citizens with hand guns or even semi automatic rifles could hold off or quell an abusive government with Cobra attack helicopters and the like at its disposal. (I doubt ANY level of abusive government is going to NUKE its own cities)

My next door neighbor could kill me just as quickly and just as dead with a 9mm Smith & Wesson as he could with a M72 LAW. The defining difference is whether he kills me in justifiable self defense or culpable murder.




-- Modified on 6/27/2008 5:36:56 AM

Damn'd, a nitwit proclamation that "people" means "tyrants" in the second amendment and that the purpose of the bill of rights was to protect the people from the government except amendment two's purpose was to protect the government from the people. Well, you are indeed an arrogant ass. You are also an ignorant ass. The consummate pinko pseduo liberal.

an M72 has considerably more stopping power than a 9mm....are you kiddin? I would'nt even own a 9mm...you wanna kill someone, you need a 45

I would be willing to bet there are more people in this country killed by 9mms than M72's.

My Glock holds 17 in the clip plus one in the chamber. If eighteen shots with hot loads by a 9mm doesn't stop someone, I doubt a 45 would do me much more good.

and take 20 paces, we're both going M72...right?

Now, if I've got mongrel hordes coming to steal my furniture and they've gotten inside my 12 gauge, and I'vre got time to squeeze off 2, I'm spending a slow moving 45 ca.

try it on a melon...RUGay2 could have his way with the entrance wound with a standard 9mm, you'd need 5 dicks to stuff the standard 45 ca hole....

nuff said for the bad guy.

now tell RUGay2 to stop barebacking your melon....

There is an absurd humor to that statement that has had me laughing for the last five minutes.

My personal light weaponry choice is the
Glock 29. Compact, concealable, and delivering a gaping 10mm hole with ballistics akin to a .357.  It even accepts the 15 round magazines from her full sized G20 sister.

I am glad you caught it. Maybe he's too preoccupied with R@FAG2 to enjoy a joke. lol

work up a joke that eventually had RUaFanofBK@? taking advantage of a piece of fruit.

You, me, and Jack at the Blue Marlin: