While we have always (since con) had the right to keep and bear arms, we have never had the right to to fire them indescriminantly into crowds.
While we have always (since con) had the right to freedom of speech. we have never had the right to scream "FIRE!" falsely into a crowded building.
The destructive use of any right is illegal.
Further. Heavy arms have always been illegal to the individual. I.E. The constitution does not protect anyones right to own a Bazooka, an operational tank, a scud missile, etc.
Communities have always had the right to limit what would be obscene within them. (That is in the same SCOTUS rulings that dumped the rain of porn us we "enjoy" today.) Most communities find it difficult to enforce, define, or prove what is agreed to be obscene within their community. However, if their is an anti-obsenity law passed it is enforceable and constitutional.
For example, you can be fined up to four hundred dollars per curse word anywhere in Texas for cursing in front of women or children. This law has been enforced and held up in court within the last 6 years.
If there are laws on the books that you don't like, you may want to get the ACLU to defend your right to ignore them. But you will still have to win in court.
No they haven't. That's a lter 20th century violation of the 2nd Amend.
No they haven't. That's a lter 20th century violation of the 2nd Amend.
I don't think you find much disagreement there. If state and local governments want to ban pornography in their hotels and let the state and local police enforce it that's one thing. That's not what the people in this article are after.
Yes, but not by the Justice Dept./ FBI. These are local ordinances and there is no reason whatsoever for the feds to enforce them.
"Further. Heavy arms have always been illegal to the individual. I.E. The constitution does not protect anyones right to own a Bazooka, an operational tank, a scud missile, etc."
WRONG on all counts. If you want proof, read the section of the Constitution which grants Congress the authority to grant "Letters of Marque and Reprisal.' These were granted to PRIVATE OWNERS OF ARMED VESSELS. Also, many of the Cannons used at the beginnings of the Revolution were owned, if not in every case by individuals, by private militias. Crew-served weapons have been privately owned since the founding of the country and some even are, to this day... though, shamefully, it is done with the "permission" of gubmint, even though, Constitutionally, none such would be needed.
ALSO, I take strong exception to your second paragraph and the falsehoods it contains. One DOES have the right, unless on private property, where speech is at the will of the owner, to falsely yell "fire." HOWEVER, that person is then ALSO free to suffer the consequences of his actions, should injury or death ensue.
No "COmmunity" has any more "right" to ban or restrict private behaviours which do not include involuntary or coerced participation by others than you have the "right" to compel your neighbor to eat broccoli, just because you think it might be good for him or to force him to NOT eat cake and ice cream because he might get fat or have bad teeth.