[eastforker]

What kind of nanny state do you want, one like UK where you do not have a right to self defense? The cops are not OBLIGATED to defend you, that is your responsibility.

[frankiep]

I don't want any kind of nanny state and I completely agree that the police should not be under any obligation to protect you. I was just trying to point out that while rulings like this are made, rightfully so, that there are still some halfwits out there who want to place more and more restrictions on our 2A rights. It's ironic because one of the arguements these gun grabbers make is that the police will be there to protect you if you need them.

[freepatriot32]

so in light of this ruling do you now agree with me that even convicted felons should be allowed to conceal carry to protect their life and family from people that the police dont have to protect you from you cant have it both ways you cant say the police have no obligation to protect you then say if you area convicted felon or a gang banger or drug dealer you shouldn't be allow ed to own the only means to protect yourself everytime i post on here that all adults should be allowed guns wtih no restrictions i get flamed so bad i have third degree burns

[white trash redneck]

If the SC is going to come down with rulings like this, then it has to (or, more accurately, a reasonable SC would) allow people the right to self defense. In a roundabout way, this ruling is a pro-2A ruling

[johnb838]

I think the police WILL protect you if they can, but if they can't you certainly can't SUE THEM. I suppose I can't come down too hard on them for this ruling. That's ok, there are plenty of others out there from the last few weeks to blast them on.

When oh when will congress rediscover it has the power, and the duty to overrule the court when it gets out of line?