< nervously crosses fingers >
IBrp.
Levin should have fun with this one later.
If they side with the “state”, the Republic will fall.................
One way or the other, it's going to be a whole new ballgame after this.
Game On!
So much for my planned stress-free holiday season.
Every Prez candidate must answer this question”:
Do you think the 2nd Amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right?
The wrong SCOTUS opinion is a declaration of civil war.
This could prove to be very interesting.
It’s too late. I’m long, long, past caring what our pseudo-masters in black robes say.
Affirmation of our right is certainly to be desired. However I seriously doubt that it will slow the gun-banners in their quest. So at best it will be a hollow victory.
If I agreed that the SC had the right to decide this, then I would agree that should they decide that gun-banning is Constitutional it would be legitimate.
Conversely if the SC rules against the individual right I will completely ignore this law, as it is absurd. My rights are not negotable.
I don’t care how many justices Lady Hillary eventually gets to appoint, nor how they rule on this. It’s just not open to furhter discussion.
“Here is the way the Court phrased the granted issue:
“Whether the following provisions — D.C. Code secs. 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02 — violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?”” “
Hopefully the unorganized militia will be taken into consideration... along with the words The People...
Will the NRA actually try to help this time?
Assuming the worst case judicial scenario followed by a few dozen worst case scenarios at the state level, would most Americans go quietly through involuntary disarmament? What is your (asking everyone) sense on how far gone the people are from the notions that founded the country? IOW, aside from political backlash (voting for the ‘other’ party, woopdeedoo), do the powers that be have anything to fear if such a policy was enacted?
Fears WELL justified I might add......
Game on!
“That decision supported the collective rights view, “
probably learned that in “journalism” class, or from the Brady Campaign.
...I can’t believe this is even a question...
Yowzah!
Of course the 2nd Amendment is meant to guarantee the right for a individual to be armed. Reading it makes that obvious however I’m thinking they will rule it to be a “collective” right. (After considering foreign laws to make that decision of course).