I'll never understand why some people work to defeat their own position. I think those who oppose this do not understand the judicial concept of strict scrutiny.
But whatever. There will eventually be bloodshed defending out right to keep and bear arms from government infringement. Might as well not constrain government further. Let's get this party started.
“Strict scrutiny” is the language of judicial jurisprudence. Its use and interpretation is entirely the invention of judges. Jurisprudence means basically judge-made law, that is, that future decisions of the court build on past decisions and stare decisis instead of the original language and intent of the law or constitution. Jurisprudence is the opposite of a written constitution. And taking language that has no history or meaning other than in jurisprudence and putting it in a constitution is just plain dangerous to the constitution.
Hope that helps.
That should read, the Alabama Constitution's Declaration of Rights concerning the right to bear arms is clear AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS!
Agreed. Strict scrutiny is the highest level of judicial review. If even the punctation of a purposed statue violates the State RKBA, it would be struck down.
the problem is obvious to me. My definition of “strict” and say,former Mayor Bloomberg’s definition will be polar opposite. You can’t leave un-drawn lines for politicians and government. The wording should be simple. “Citizens have a natural right to bear arms and this amendment is a guarantee that no authority can infringe on said God-given right, ever”. <- Period