[Sasparilla]

Heller

[backwoods-engineer]

The 2nd Amendment is the Left's #1 target.

Our Republic is in severe jeopardy today because of Justice Scalia's death yesterday.

I believe Obama will appoint Scalia's successor, and that McConnell and the Senate will confirm anyone Obama wants, including the odious Eric Holder.

Imagine a 5-4 Supreme Court decision interpreting the 2nd Amendment to ban the mere possession of handguns. It could happen. MILLIONS of us would not comply, of course. Any attempt to force us would lead to mass death.

But this one event, Scalia's death, could be the inflection point of the downfall of the American Republic, and quite possibly the traceable initiation of the 2nd American Civil War.

[Arlis]

Scalia was one of our most brilliant jurists ever.....in so many ways. But God took him home.

My only question on the Heller ruling was why Scalia didn’t go further, focusing on the word “infringed”. “Not be infringed” means shall not be hindered in any way, shape, or form - at all.

Yet, even concealed carry laws “infringe” on the right to bear arms. So do laws prohibiting weapons in Federal buildings, courts, and schools. So are laws that prohibit automatic weapons.

“Not be infringed” has been contradicted and violated in so many ways. No one will address the meaning of “infringed.”

[ROCKLOBSTER]

It was the first Supreme Court decision to authoritatively interpret the Second Amendment.

Why, was it written in some foreign language?

[libertylover]

It was the first Supreme Court decision to authoritatively interpret the Second Amendment

That's because for most people, "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", is pretty easy to understand.

[maine-iac7]

Well, that sett;es it - we MUST elect Trump - This is the kind of Justice he would appoint

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/423196/trump-praises-his-sister-pro-abortion-extremist-judge-ramesh-ponnuru

Time to take the blinders off, folks

[SharpRightTurn]

“Man legal scholars, when reading that amendment, might interpret the ‘right to possess a firearm’ does not apply to ordinary civilians who aren't in the military. Scalia, however, said the first part of the sentence — ‘a well regulated militia’ — merely stated why it was important for the American people to be able to bear arms: It was important for Americans to have this right so they could have a well-regulated militia. Scalia argued that first clause didn't ‘limit the scope’ of the second part of the sentence — that the ‘right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.’ Americans needed this right so they could have a well-regulated militia’.”

Scalia’s holding is the same position as that taken by Ted Cruz in the amicus brief he filed in Heller. Two top-notch, constitutional originalists who helped win the day in a 5-4 decision.

With Scalia now gone, it is absolutely critical we elect a president who knows how to select an originalist constitutional scholar who will hold firm just like Scalia did in Heller.