Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Bull Snipe
What I am saying is that the Court can in fact radically change its interpretation of the Second Amendment and depending on who replaces Scalia may well do so.

Exactly correct! And it need not happen all at once (that would cause considerable blow-back). It could happen in stages: prohibit handguns, then semi-auto rifles, etc.

That is not so far-fetched. We saw exactly the same process with the 10A. Even after the Civil War, states were darn near sovereign entities. Now DC can tell some school in, say, Idaho, what they must serve for lunch.

86 posted on 02/18/2016 6:22:57 PM PST by Leaning Right (Why am I holding this lantern? I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]


To: Leaning Right

They can tell schools in Idaho what to serve for lunch only as long as the schools in Idaho accept Federal money for the school lunch program. In other words, accept the king’s shilling, expect to do the king’s bidding. They do not have to participate in the Federal program. The voters of Idaho can reject the federal money and feed their children what ever they feel is appropriate, all they have to do is be willing to pay for it.


92 posted on 02/18/2016 6:31:44 PM PST by Bull Snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson