This is what frustrates me the most about some people on FR. We claim that the media is lame, yet pants are wet by out of context statements intentially published to elicit a response.
Please fill in the context.
Justices talk in hypotheticals because they can’t state their specific opinions on untested issues till it’s before the court.
Scalia would not vote to ban most if not any types of small arms because of the obvious way in which he interprets the 2nd amendment. If a ban or restriction places a defacto infringement on a right, he’ll strike it down.
Look at Heller. He cites specifically the defensive need of a pistol and how it must be at the ready to properly defend.
This is what frustrates me the most about some people on FR. We claim that the media is lame, yet pants are wet by out of context statements intentially published to elicit a response.
Dude, we have people here that think “a lot of hits” on Google means “correct.”
I fear FR is losing the edge that great (GREAT) freepers like Buckhead honed...