Whew! What's next? Machine guns are arms? Licensing anyone is an infringement? Concealed or open carry is protected under "to bear arms"?
That's really about all they left out.
Interesting. On three fronts: A) The second amendment protects an individual right, B) The second amendment applies to the states, and C) The District of Columbia is a state.
Whew! What's next? Machine guns are arms? Licensing anyone is an infringement? Concealed or open carry is protected under "to bear arms"?
That's really about all they left out.
Is there really any difference on how you would behave if you had a full auto assault rifle as opposed to a revolver? The answer is no, that is why regulating guns is a loser from the get go. The obvious corollary, an honest law abiding citizen is a honest law abiding citizen. And Democrats do not trust those people to act responsibly.
There you go with the lies again.
They specifically stated that just because a Citizen lives in DC, does not mean that the Constitutions protections for their Rights do not apply.
Just because it guts every gun grabber argument you've ever used on these boards is no reason to resort to further dishonesty.
That would be effin' awesome.
Good to see you here.
Hope you are ready to eat a little crow.
This is the first step on a long road.
Once this is upheld - and it can't be overturned without calling into question the liberal's pet individual rights cases dealing with abortion, sodomy and other classic "left" issues - the next thing to be determined is whether the individual right is fundamental or not.
This must be done so that SCOTUS can determine what type of individual right analysis to use when analyzing how the various laws stand with respect to the second amendment.
Going to be a fun next 10 or 15 years.