Scalia: Guns May be Regulated

National Journal ^ | July 29, 2012 | John Aloysius Farrell

[Greystoke]

Justice Antonin Scalia, one of the Supreme Court's most vocal and conservative justices, said on Sunday that the Second Amendment leaves room for U.S. legislatures to regulate guns, including menacing hand-held weapons.

"It will have to be decided in future cases," Scalia said on Fox News Sunday. But there were legal precedents from the days of the Founding Fathers that banned frightening weapons which a constitutional originalist like himself must recognize. There were also "locational limitations" on where weapons could be carried, the justice noted.

When asked if that kind of precedent would apply to assault weapons, or 100-round ammunition magazines like those used in the recent Colorado movie theater massacre, Scalia declined to speculate. "We'll see," he said. '"It will have to be decided."

[linn37]

It was a very entertaining interview.

[New Jersey Realist]

What frightening weapons banned by our founders is he referring to?

[JudgemAll]

THese rinos only see one side, the numerator. The militia clause means we should be able to organize ourselves as the state grows in its one sided observation of our lives, while we have no say and no representation.

Scalia is way off the line there.

It’s like the Rinos are gay guys who do not know it yet, except we have a GOP-E and liberal fascist system which does not know it is about to enjoy rapine gthe country. Karl Jung talked about people of power who wanted to realize rape psychosis, thinking they were good and normal people, when in fact they were corrupt and on the verge of going Jack the Ripper.

The movie theater attack is exactly that in COlorado, and they are reacting in “feel for” the perp and against gun and free speech theater goers.

[3Fingas]

I think we are all just a bit wobbly and off-balance from the recent Roberts defection. The last thing most of us want to hear is the Scalia is now turning like some pod person — transforming into a new life form a la Roberts.

That’s why I initially posted that I hope that he was misquoted...

[Lady Jag]

So, you're in on it, too, Mr. Scalia...

[3Fingas]

I think we are all just a bit wobbly and off-balance from the recent Roberts defection. The last thing most of us want to hear is the Scalia is now turning like some pod person — transforming into a new life form a la Roberts.

That’s why I initially posted that I hope that he was misquoted...

[JudgemAll]

I think the context is the Rino Romney campaign getting into flip flop gear and giving heads up to scalia

[JudgemAll]

Romeny getting ready to betray us via scalia.... psychosis perv of LDS kicking in sodom gear?

[Olog-hai]

That’s the same logic that resulted in “safe, legal abortions”, with all due respect. What”s not to understand about a bill of rights?

[broken_arrow1]

I hope he (Scalia) was talking about nukes and cruise missiles. It was very clear to any freedom loving Constitutionalist that the founders were talking about the "right to bear arms" in empowering the people with the ability to over-throw a tyranical government, like a move toward totalitarian dictatorship, all options should be on the table. And, like Roberts decision on Obamacare, SCOTUS erroneous decisions doesn't make it constitutional.

[Political Junkie Too]

When Scalia refers to regulating, he's speaking of the first part, a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state,... I think he's talking about regulating the weapons in terms of what's reasonable and practical, not what's available. They can't take away the right to bear arms, and they can't regulate back to muskets only, but they can regulate to what is reasonable to maintain a practical civil defense force for personal or neighborhood protection.

- PJ

[CityCenter]

I can understand that, but too often we react without having all the information we need. It’s getting to the point that any mere slight gets a person labled a RINO. By some measures, I wonder if a true conservative even exists anymore with the exception of the name valler who is 100% true to the definition of “conservative” in their own mind.

[omega4179]

The M72 is a militia weapon, is only one shot and is hand-bearable. There is no authority to regulate it in the hands of the militia.

[iontheball]

Watching the interview now and it was taken out of context
__________________________________________________________

Yes, but Scalia should have known to keep his trap shut on this important issue and not give the liberals anything they could distort to their advantage.

[omega4179]

Well Regulated meant well trained in the language the amendment was written.

[Olog-hai]

. . . and meanwhile, the criminals fear the regulation, or flout it . . . ?

[reasonisfaith]

Scalia is now failing us. But this should not be a surprise.

Put a man in Washington long enough, and he will start to see his power as the source of our liberty. He will soon believe that anything that comes from himself must be good.

But Scalia is wrong here. The integrity of our nation does not depend on Antonin Scalia’s faith in himself. It depends on Scalia’s ability to uphold external truth.

Antonin—both your moral character and your intellect are being tested here.

[Carl Vehse]

In Justice Scalia’s case, senility is a “best construction” to the alternative of treason.

[New Jersey Realist]

Now this is one awesome weapon everyone should own.

This photo shows a Polaris missile launch at the navy's San Clemente Island range, in1959.

[3Fingas]

We don’t need purity tests; however, we do need jurists who decide in the favor of reducing government. We have far too many regulations on gun ownership already and an ever-more ubiquitous government presence in our lives in general. Scalia may have been giving the answer he thought was appropriate for the venue he was at, but any talk of additional regulations on gun ownership, even if it is hypothetical, causes my “Oh-crap-ometer” to rise another degree or two.