Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court Holds Right to Bear Arms Applies to Individuals
Now.Imperfect writes "In its last day of session, the Supreme Court has definitively clarified the meaning of the Second Amendment. The confusion is whether the Second Amendment allows merely for the existence of a state militia, or the private ownership of guns. This ruling is in response to a case regarding the 32-year-old Washington DC ban on guns." This is one of the most-watched Supreme Court cases in a long time, and Wikipedia's page on the case gives a good overview; the actual text of the decision (PDF) runs to 157 pages, but the holding is summarized in the first three. There are certainly other aspects of the Second Amendment left unaddressed, however, so you can't go straight to the store for a recently made automatic rifle.
According to Chris Rock we don't need gun control, we need bullet control.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
Wait a minute...are you suggesting that this one decision, this one moment in time, exonerates the current administration from all of the countless fuck-ups they've committed over the last seven years?
You, sir, are full of shit. I don't agree with this decision (mainly on principal, but also on the fact that the so-called "originalists" on the court basically reversed about a centuries worth of decisions previously decided), but that doesn't matter. Just take your strawman and go home.
Exactly. An if obama is elected, it will be a disaster. A democrat controlled congress with a noe-marxist democrat president would push us into a bizarro world of entitlement programs crippling the economy with liberties curtailed in every aspect of our lives legislatively. Thank God the court is slightly conservative now.
"Yes, statistics prove that brandishings and the possible arming of people stops of crime."
FYP.
Regardless, owning a gun is my right. I really couldn't give a fuck what your opinion about that is, and no amount of after the fact whinging, name calling (gun nuts?) or fake assertions by you can change that in any way.
I look forward to putting some rounds downrange. Any chance you could send me a picture?
Can you substantiate your claims with facts? Because every statistic and study I have read contradict what you are saying.
That's the crux of the problem with gun laws in general. Criminals, by definition aren't interested in following the law, therefore, the stringent gun laws only hamper law abiding citizens.
Yes, it is true that during the temporary transitional phase from war-zone / wild-west to modern civilisation, there is a chance that criminals will hold on to those guns still floating around whilst law-abiding citizens have to rely on the police. Just hang on.
And I think I was trying to say what's in my post above. Anything else is a strawman. Laugh all you want. Small things amuse small minds.
No matter where the guns come from, if you have one, and they are banned or need a license, then police can arrest you. It's much harder for violent crime to occur. Perhaps even if you paired it with a clamp-down on gun smuggling, perhaps you'd have something effective.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
That's just it.
Once a certain success has been achieved as regards removing guns from the general public, it gets to the point where the police are not allowed them either (except for specialised gun squads called in the occasional siege) and do not even want to.
You don't see gun-toting British bobbies, do ya?