[Ken H]

Just think how different things might have been if we’d have had Bork on the SCOTUS instead of Anthony Kennedy...

With Bork on the Court, Heller might have gone the wrong way:

____________________________________________________________

The Second Amendment states somewhat ambiguously: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The first part of the Amendment supports proponents of gun control by seeming to make the possession of firearms contingent upon being a member of a state-regulated militia. The next part is cited by opponents of gun control as a guarantee of the individual's right to possess such weapons, since he can always be called to militia service. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that there is no individual right to own a firearm.

The Second Amendment was designed to allow states to defend themselves against a possible tyrannical national government. Now that the federal government has stealth bombers and nuclear weapons, it is hard to imagine what people would need to keep in the garage to serve that purpose.

-footnote, Slouching Toward Gomorrah, Robert Bork

[microgood]

The Second Amendment states somewhat ambiguously: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Bork obviously does not understand the English language or what an independent clause is.

[Joe 6-pack]

I’ve never said Bork was perfect, and certainly I disagree with some of his 2nd Amendment stances over the years. That’s one of my primary personal issues, and is one reason I support Santorum who has higher lifetime ratings from both the NRA and GOA than does Newt.