"We reiterated that ‘[a]t its core, the Second Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to possess non-dangerous weapons for self-defense in the home,’ and thus, under Heller, ‘restrictions on the possession of dangerous and unusual weapons are not constitutionally suspect because these weapons are outside the ambit of the amendment,’” the opinion states. “[G]overnments may restrict the possession of machine guns.” [More]
Well heck -- if legal scholars in black robes say we have no right to keep and bear militia-suitable arms because they're "dangerous," who are we to argue?
8 comments:
All firearms are inherently dangerous - that is the whole point! What use is a "non-dangerous" weapon?
Further, as the brief succinctly pointed out, "...the dangerous and unusual doctrine does not pertain to the mere possession of a firearm (or other weapon), but only applies to the manner in which that right is exercised."
It is only a matter of time before the SCOTUS weighs in on this. How convenient that Justice Antonin Scalia passed away recently.
An outcome predicted by many in the pro-gun community - I dare say, an overwhelming majority. Many of whom pleaded to drop this case before actual harm was done, but stupider heads prevailed and here we are.
I hope the lawyers paid the client, and not the other way around because this decision was long telegraphed by previous court rulings dealing with Heller / McDonald. I do hope they are not stupid enough to try and appeal this to the supreme court, or we will lose huge.
They don't care, David. It is "good public policy", meaning the way they want it to be. Principles do not matter. It is what they can get away with.
To Anon @ 10:36PM,
An admission of rank tyranny by the US Supreme Court is harm in the same way that a surgeon harms a patient by inflicting further cuts on the patient's body. The harm has already been caused by the malignant cancer which is the criminal disregard for the very law that authorizes the continued existence of such a court (and related government)!
The US government has an explicit order written into its list of enumerated, delegated powers that is SHALL NOT infringe upon the possession and carrying of arms. When its agents do so anyway, that is literally "outside the law", more commonly referred to as criminal behavior.
By "overwhelming majority," you mean the establishment crowd, which also ducked a 2A case for years and then tried to hijack the one filed by those sick of waiting? So it's better to not ask and therefore not know, so we can keep pretending we have rights that will "someday" be recognized?
And the criticism lies not with the rapists but with the victims who protest, using any tools at hand because you armchair quarterbacks wouldn't offer anything but discouragement?
What happened to "a right delayed is a right denied"?
What makes you think there will be a later or a "better time"? The pathway to citizenship, another threat you guys are in denial over and/or just don't want to rock any access boats over, will take care of that within 20 years unless it's turned back now. You doing anything about that? What?
Some of us prefer to know where we stand now, so we can try something else besides rice bowl-filling tactics and sending promiscuous political emails begging gun-grabbers not to be mean to us. We're the ones offering them a chance to do the right thing, before they force it all to go to hell.
You know, it's really not nice or very manly to call someone who's put his name out there "stupid" from the unaccountable safety of anonymity. What's your stake in this?
Well said, David. The sooner the highest court in the nation settles this issue, the better.
You may remember that there are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and cartridge. I submit that we want the "jury" to have their say, as we all know the last box remains. Let's not delay any further.
Anonymous, who called out true Patriots as "stupid," in my response I simply will defer to Patriot Samuel Adams:
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
― Samuel Adams
Was the NRA-ILA involved in this case? If not, SHAME on them. You better ask yourselves, "who's really fighting for your rights?" Molon Labe
Post a Comment