Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: budwiesest
"Assuming as you do (that states may dictate rules regarding keeping and bearing of arms) this clause would undermine the lack of uniformity among the states ( shall-issue, may-issue, concealed vs open carry) as now displayed."

It would. Your example demonstrates that the second amendment does not apply to the states -- if it did, equal protection and due process would demand that the laws be uniform.

"Since they are not limited in what they may regulate (your notion) why haven't the folks at Commerce cracked-down on the lack of 'uniformity' in this regard?"

Well, the Commerce Clause gives Congres the power. It doesn't mean that Congress must exercise the power.

1,348 posted on 11/25/2007 6:22:05 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1343 | View Replies ]


To: All

I fully expect the judges (given past experience with some judges) to go for a self interest fear type of nuanced absurdity.

IOW the second is an individual right and that DC has a strict scrutiny passable interest in protecting DC elitists in disarming the citizens from owning handguns or exercising their individual right. (kind of a time place and manner regulation)

However the citizens are still allowed to own long guns for hunting. (gratuitous sarcasm on last sentence)


1,349 posted on 11/25/2007 6:32:56 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1348 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson