“but the U.S. Constitution is the U.S. Constitution. Surely he can’t be serious”
Sure he is serious. Why not get rid of that pesky 1st amendment next?
I’m not from Chicago but if the law there for the last 30 years was against handgun ownership (as stated in the IBD article) why didn’t someone start a handgun leasing business... say a one time upfront payment equal to what you’d pay to purchase elsewhere with 99 year terms???
What is frightening is that there are 4 supreme court justices that voted to remove our second amendment rights. If the supreme court could remove the 2nd amendment rights how about the first?
Otis McDonald, you have my support!!
We need simple bumper stickers that say:
“Thank you Otis McDonald”
Let ‘em ask why.
Otis McDonald, 76, an Army vet who lives in a high-crime area of Chicago, thinks the Constitution gives him the right to bear arms to protect himself and his wife as he protected his country. We think so too.
So the question I have is this: there have been serious infringements on the clear language of the Second Amendment in the past, no doubt. Check your guns at the town marshal’s office. Felons don’t get to bear arms. How do you reconcile this legally with the law?
I’ve discussed this issue with you before, DC, and I came around to your way of thinking on incorporation. I have an open mind on this and actually think that probably both the practices above are overreaching. But I’d like to hear you reconcile those practices with an expansive reading of the people’s right to bear arms, if that is possible.
Are there (as we interpret the Constitution), and should there be, any limitations on the rights of private citizens (not state militia’s) to bear any kind of arms?