This is a discussion on Scalia "Open" To Gun Control? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Disturbing news coming from a so called conservative justice. Scalia: Guns May be Regulated - John Aloysius Farrell - NationalJournal.com...
Disturbing news coming from a so called conservative justice.
Scalia: Guns May be Regulated - John Aloysius Farrell - NationalJournal.com
Oh those darn menacing weapons!including menacing hand-held weapons.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable- JFK
Does anyone know what these early Federal restrictions were? As for the early history of the local limitations I believe that they were free to create laws they felt were necessary. At that time it was thought that the Constitution was a limit on Federal powers not the individual States. In my opinion the States at that time were free to regulate arms while the Federal Government was expressly denied that power."It will have to be decided in future cases," Scalia said on Fox News Sunday. But there were legal precedents from the days of the Founding Fathers that banned frightening weapons which a constitutional originalist like himself must recognize. There were also "locational limitations" on where weapons could be carried, the justice noted.
Regulations are only for people that obey them same as any law.
For any Judge,Lawyer,Politician, LEO, Minister, whoever to think that any law prevents anything is a flawed premise and an inconsistent thought process.
That mind set has allowed over 20 thousand laws... all of them in the name of regulation to be instituted and none of them are worth the paper that they are written on.
Two Hundred years ago, any free man could own any weapon that they saw fit...up to and including artillery pieces. Any one care to guess how many cannons were used in a crime? Not excluding killing tyrants or their soldiers of course.
Wanted to use an assault weapon back in the day? Go get a .69 Caliber flintlock at the local gun shop. You could own the same weapon as the Army. Want a pointy bayonet to stick on the end of it? Go take a days wages and get one.
Fact of the matter is, the Revolutionary War was one that saw citizen/soldiers fielding better weapons than either military had. It is well documented where civilian troops used hunting rifles that were more accurate at a longer range to great effect..actually giving them the upper hand. Many a British Officer wrote home to tell his family that these American Rebels were cheating and not fighting like honorable men.
Really...what real purpose do gun laws serve?
I've been asking this question for years and not one time got a satisfactory justification from someone that thinks like a free man. Liberals, touchy feely types,fence sitters, those that are confused and even those that wear the black robs that puff their chests out when they speak always use the same old tired arguments that they have been spoon fed since they went to school. Its the same old crap rehashed over and over and over.
They'll have us all carrying muskets by the time they're done!
You can educate ignorance, you can't fix stupid
Retired DE Trooper, SA XD40 SC, S&W 2" Airweight
dukalmighty & Pure Kustom Black Ops Pro "Trooper" Holsters, DE CCDW and LEOSA Permits, Vietnam Vet 68-69 Pleiku
-It is a seriously scary thought that there are subsets of American society that think being intellectual is a BAD thing...
If those in power can control the weapons and the food they control everything. Total power.Really...what real purpose do gun laws serve?
If Obama made this statement people would be total freaking out. All the "see I told you so's" would be out in force with their heads spinning around like the Exorcist. A conservative Judge says it and it seems logical and somehow understandable????
"Confidence is food for the wise man but liquor for the fool"
There is nothing "understandable" about it.A conservative Judge says it and it seems logical and somehow understandable????
It's the "friends" of this country that do more damage to gun ownership by claiming to be conservative. In reality, none of them are "conservative" by technical terms.
At least Obama is a known enemy of gun ownership and makes no bones about it. As far as I am concerned, he isn't as dangerous as most of our so called "friends".
Forefathers = "I told you we should have been a little more specific..."
Vietnam Vets, WELCOME HOME
Crossman 760 BB/Pellet, Daisy Red Ryder, Crossman Wrist Rocket, 14 Steak Knives, 3 Fillet Knives, Rolling Pin-14", Various Hunting Knives, 2 Baseball Bats, 3 Big Dogs and a big American Flag flying in the yard. I have no firearms; Try the next house.
Don"t let stupid be your skill set....
And Shepards we shall be, for Thee, my Lord, for Thee,
Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, So that our feet may swiftly carry out thy command,
And we shall flow a river forth to Thee, And teeming with souls shall it ever be,
I saw this on Fox News Sunday. I think he is telling us that we have to be darn careful about who we elect to appoint Supreme Court Judges. He is right.
The Party of Lawyers know all the tricks and loop holes and usually command a large liberal Judicial block who are not afraid to set law from the bench. Supreme Court is the only thing that keeps them in check....so far. Is there anything that is set in stone?? There always seems to be some liberal/progressive snot with a rock hammer to chip away at it. To reshape it to fit their fantasy land ideal and not the working reality.
This was a huge "Beware!" sign from Justice Scalia IMO.
A woman must not depend on protection by men. A woman must learn to protect herself.
Susan B. Anthony
A armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one has to back it up with his life.
So - I guess the 2A protects our right to have our very own thermonuclear device?
How about your own private warship? Attack helicopter? Fighter/bomber?
How about a tank with functional weaponry? Flamethrower? Anti-tank missile launcher?
Point is that...YES indeed...there are limits on the 2A. Just like there are limits on the 1A (libel, slander, child porn, etc).
My personal opinion is this - citizens should be able to have weapons that are equivalent to the basic infantry standard issue weapon. That gets you to the "militia" part of the wording of the 2A.
I'll go put my Nomex on. This should get interesting...
The number of people killed because they didn't have "enough gun" is dwarfed by those who had none at all.