The saving grace in Heller is that the unconstitutional verbiage in Justice Scalia’s majority opinion constitutes what lawyers call dicta — expressions extraneous to the issue presented to the court for decision, and therefore without legal force as “precedent.” Heller did not involve the possession of an M-16, or who might be disqualified from possessing firearms, or “gun-free zones,” or any statutes providing for “gun control” other than a few in the District of Columbia. Nonetheless, anti-gun legislators, politicians, special-interest groups, and media in every bastion of “gun-control” irrationality and fanaticism are already attempting to exploit the bare language, whatever its lack of legal effect, in new plots to disarm “the people.”Edwin Vieira, Jr. speaks with credibility. We would do well to pay heed.
[Via Ron W]
4 comments:
They can attempt to exploit whatever language they want, but it doesn't mean anything unless they can convince 'we the people' to allow them to pass laws to disarm 'we the people'.
Our task remains to educate 'we the people' about the perils of civilian disarmament.
Frankly, I think very few people are listening to them ranting from their soapboxes.
Our other big task is to hold the rabid disarmament dogs at bay in our Federal Government, especially given the nod that the Dems have given to Biden, the national sympathy for Kennedy (I don't intend to slight the man, he is facing a grave medical future---but I don't want to see sympathy votes for his gun control schemes either), and of course the looming Obama presidency.
The greatest minds of their time said "shall not be infringed."
Supposedly one of the greatest minds of OUR time says "the right is not unlimited."
I've chosen the line I'm going to be in.
So have our Overseers. They never saw an UNreasonable restriction. After all, they WRITE them.
I love the sign in the photo: "If guns kill people, do PENS misspell words?"
3%
smith, I am terminally ill. I did not notice any great benefit to my character, so just why would you worry about slighting the man. He has slighted himself, long before he had a brain tumor.
Hell, the tumor might drive him sane.
or is that just an attempt to not appear heartless?
Post a Comment