To: Bob Leibowitz
In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority “would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.”
WTF...damn straight Justice Paul!
27 posted on
06/26/2008 7:43:51 AM PDT by
mr_hammer
(Checking the breeze and barking at things that go bump in the night.)
To: mr_hammer
"the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.” The man hits the nail on the head -- and STILL comes down on the wrong side!
34 posted on
06/26/2008 7:48:53 AM PDT by
ClearCase_guy
(Et si omnes ego non)
To: mr_hammer
In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority “would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.” The government is still authorized to regulate the civilian uses of weapons - it always has been.
What it is not authorized to do is regulate ownership.
The state can tell you that it is not permissible to conduct target practice in a public park - but it cannot tell you that you cannot own a firearm.
83 posted on
06/26/2008 8:27:29 AM PDT by
wideawake
(Why is it that those who call themselves Constitutionalists know the least about the Constitution?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson