Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: AtlasStalled
From the article: "Once the federal government stops the drug cartels -- and further eliminates all those other garden variety murders, burglaries, rapes, assaults, etc. which plague society -- maybe then it can credibly claim there is no need for ordinary citizens to hold semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines."

No... only the "ordinary citizen" should decide if he himself has a "need" to hold a semi auto rifle with a standard capacity magazine. Im tired of other people saying they will decide if you have such a "need".

3 posted on 01/27/2013 6:33:06 AM PST by GregoTX (Federalist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: GregoTX

only the “ordinary citizen” should decide if he himself has a “need” to hold a semi auto rifle with a standard capacity magazine. Im tired of other people saying they will decide if you have such a “need”.

^^^^^^

I agree with you GregoTX; however, when the Courts analyze a Congressional statute against the Constitution they often look at the context in which the legislation was passed in weighing the competing needs and interests. Although I agree with you that as a principled matter the Second Amendment is not subject to legislative negotiation, as a practical matter the courts will look at whether citizens have a need for semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines in deciding whether to strike or uphold the legislation. Even Scalia said that the Second Amendment — like most constitutional rights — is subject to limitations, and we have to be prepared to establish the legitimate need for those arms which may be targeted.


7 posted on 01/27/2013 6:45:20 AM PST by AtlasStalled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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