FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 02/10/2014 6:12:13 PM PST by neverdem
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to decide this month whether to hear two cases seeking clarification on what the Constitution’s framers intended in granting citizens the right to not only own but also “bear” arms.
Lyle Denniston, a National Constitution Center adviser, writes on the Philadelphia Inquirer’s website that the National Rifle Association has, of late, brought two cases before the Supreme Court challenging prevailing legal wisdom that while the Second Amendment grants U.S. citizens the right to own or “keep” arms, that right does not necessarily extend to their ability to “bear” arms outside of their personal residences.
In one case, rooted in Texas, the NRA is reportedly challenging a state law permitting minors to own guns, but stipulating all the same that they are, in fact, too young to apply for -- and thus possess -- the license necessary to carry them in public...
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
“In the home” is not “bearing”; that is storing: the home is an armory.
And why is “arms” always conflated to mean firearms only; when written, edged weapons were also commonly born. That has been infringed out existence almost universally.
2A has been so infringed to death incrementally as to be surreal.
EUREKA!
The Second Amendment protects the right to wear a COAT OF ARMS!
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 purpose is to IDENTIFY The People, so they won't be mistaken for the enemy by the "well regulated militia'! When the troops see a citizen wearing (BEARING) the American flag (ARMS) lapel pin, they'll know that person is an American, not a Red Coat. It has nothing to do with weapons!
(SS) J. Roberts, Chief Justice, SCOTUS
lol
Are you sure it isn’t?
We are 1 SCOTUS decision away from CWII and Roberts may well be the vote the left needs to go full scale against the American people.
Roberts agreed with Heller. 70 % of Americas or more agree with the Second Amendment.
It would be nice if they ruled that “shall not be infringed” means “shall not be infringed”, but I’m not that optimistic.
If the left has their way the second amendment will mean the right to not have your arms cut off at the shoulder and to wear short sleeved shirts.
Our Second Amendment does not limit. Only authoritarian control freaks limit. The intent of the second amendment was to allow the citizens the right to have weapons comparable to those of an opposing army. The really means we should have the right to own a tank or machine gun or whatever is to be used against us.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Heller should have been a more broad ruling. The majority opinion was written in such a way to where many many cases like this will inevitably come back to them for clarification/resolution, and it will take years to get worked out. What’s scary as hell to me is the fact that the Justices that made up that original ruling majority will not be there during the entire process.
We are but ONE Supreme Court Justice away from effectively repealing the 2nd Amendment! All that would be required is an untimely death of Kennedy, Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, or Alito while a progressive president is in office. Of course, its always possible for Roberts to ‘evolve’ into another Justice Souter.
Absolutely. And when you bring up the fact that, if we honored the 2A as we do the 1A, then Bill Gates, if he wanted to, could have his own Carrier Battle Group complete with B61/B43 bombs.
Someone once asked me, "You are a Libertarian? Aren't you the nuts that believes everyone should own a tank?" ....to which I reply, "No, Libertarians don't believe everyone should own a tank. Libertarians believe that if you CHOOSE to own a tank, please drive it on the correct side of the road, and be careful where you aim it".
A legal case will be made that the modern interpretation of “militia” will be the National Guard.
Count on it.
Done.
Illness or accident could put one of the Conservative justices out of action. With the dems exercising the nuclear option zero could appoint a transgendered, homosexual, mohammaden communist like himself to the bench with no interference from the Republicans.
It doesn't matter what Americans want.
The Constitution grants exactly NO rights. It enumerates rights that existed long before the Constitution came into being.
Which will be read by liberal states and the BATFE to mean that people who do not have basement vaults (or basements) are prohibited from owning arms.
The Tree of Liberty withered and died a long time ago. The statists then cut it down and whittled it into trivets for their coffee mugs.
Jefferson is rolling in his grave with that statement.
I flirted with libertarianism (little L) when I was young. Met some of the Libertarians (Big L) and decided I was not one.
But I am a Texan and I think I should be able to own a tank if I felt I need one. But not real sure what constitutes an illegal gun today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.