i wonder what the actual amendment says... hmmm
That picture pegged my soydar.
“What’s happening now is a fight over what the Second Amendment ultimately means,”
It’s in plain fricking English.
Only a Chardonnay swilling beta cuck male who couldn’t get an erection if he filled the entire trunk of his Chevy Volt with Viagra and took it all at once would have trouble understanding it.
Oh look! You found one.
L
For an NPR article that was almost even handed.
NPR “National Public Radio”
Also known as “Public Radio International” (spoken with a smug French accent)
All Leftist Slime.
there has been written several books on the 2nd Amendment. My personal favorite is SENATE REPORT ON THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS by the US Government Printing office, 1982. It is now out of print and highly suppressed.
Hard to find an on line copy but I did. It also has counter arguments to it’s pro-gun stance.
https://guncite.com/journals/senrpt/senrpt.html
I still have my old paper copy.
Such a girly man.
They can’t process the simple phrase “shall not be infringed”, can they?
There’s no actual debate over the history. There was basically no gun control at all until the mid 19th century when the first gun control laws were passed......against Blacks only.
Go ahead and let the gun grabbers try to approvingly cite those as precedent. LOL!
tl;dr: Leftists are looking for other leftists with history degrees who will dig up obscure texts that they can bend into reasons to defy Bruen and do lawfare against 2A.
See also: repurposing 1919 flu regulations to mean shutting down the whole economy; bending civil war texts to try and jail Trump.
The Bill of Rights means what it says.
And the history of gun control is racist.
Since the supremes have also determined that the police have no obligation to protect us, we refuse to be disarmed & unable to defend ourselves.
It should read,”Hi, my name is Karen. I am the last in line of anatomical sphincters. I live in a gun free zone.”
That “guy” looks like a professional eggplant polisher.
And with the upcoming events more and more people are arming themselves. I just came from the nearby Walmart where I bought some 7.62x51. The checkout lady said for the first time in her life she wants to buy a gun. She’s afraid of what’s about to happen and that a cop told her to get self defense oriented. She appears to be close to 50 and the last time she shot a gun was a 22 when she was a kid.
There will be a surge in sales soon, and the those trying to subvert the 2A will be too late. I suspect more and more non-shooters will be arming themselves.
The Constitution generally regulates “behavior” (the shall and shall nots). It does not generally regulate implementations. One could conclude that as long as the behavior were lawful (Constitutional) then the tools used to protect the lawful behavior are protected.
The anti-gun crowd like to cite mass shootings or “gun violence” statistics (which regularly include suicides) as a basis for regulation or confiscation. In the common law, in courts of equity, the maxim emerged … ”Ab abusu ad usum non valet consequentia.” [A conclusion about the use of a thing from its abuse is invalid.]
… or whatever.