Supreme Court Upholds Gun Right

[Buffalo Roam]

The U.S. Supreme Court has just held that the Second Amendment is a Individual Right, and that the Individual has the right own fire arms, for defence and hunting.

[cosmictraveler]

The U.S. Supreme Court has just held that the Second Amendment is a Individual Right, and that the Individual has the right own fire arms, for defence and hunting.

That's good for the time being for those who needed the affirmation.

[S.A.M.]

Heh, the Supreme court decides that weapons are a right. How long before it decides that killing is a right?

[Echo3Romeo]

Heh, the Supreme court decides that weapons are a right. How long before it decides that killing is a right?

Third post!

[superstring01]

Heh, the Supreme court decides that weapons are a right. How long before it decides that killing is a right?

As you well know, it's written in the Constitution. Until the American people see to it that it's amended, then the Supreme Court has little room to maneuver.

Some, like me, see this as a firewall against overwhelming government intrusion. All the deaths in the world won't amount to a hill of beans against a totalitarian government that cannot be toppled by a well armed public.

That you cannot appreciate this fact places you only one step further in the long line of people who are willing to suffer fewer rights in order to live in a some cushy government padded utopia.

~String

[S.A.M.]

Do you see Americans rising against a totalitarian government?

[superstring01]

Do you see Americans rising against a totalitarian government?

Yes.

And we won't have to if we observe the strictures of the Bill of Rights.

~String

[S.A.M.]

I don't see any Americans standing against a totalitarian government. Most of them are too apathetic to care.

The rest are all talk.

[Buffalo Roam]

I don't see any Americans standing against a totalitarian government. Most of them are too apathetic to care.

The rest are all talk.

Many Americans are standing against Islam, a totalitarian religion/government.

But many of them are to apathetic to care.

Yes SAM we know who is all talk, look in the mirror.

[S.A.M.]

Heh, see? This ^^^^ "American" advocates religious bigotry as an American institution.

[Echo3Romeo]

From the opinion (PDF):

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

Whoops, there goes the argument that people shouldn't have machineguns or any other modern firearms.

[S.A.M.]

Yeah, some students were found with Uzis in our university. Apparently, they are as easy to get as apple pie. Whoopie.

Maybe all students should get machine guns.

[John99]

Which students?

[Buffalo Roam]

Yeah, some students were found with Uzis in our university. Apparently, they are as easy to get as apple pie. Whoopie.

Maybe all students should get machine guns.

Yes, in the middle east every one has a AK...Uzi...RPK...just look at the news, every jihadi and student has a machine gun or a RPG, and they have no problem getting them in Islam do they.

Yes we see who is armed to the teeth, and it isn't the average American.

[S.A.M.]

And that is a good thing, according to your Supreme Court, so you should be jumping with joy.

In fact, you should be protesting all the people who do not have a weapon.

This will also boost your already exploding arms industry.

[superstring01]

And that is a good thing, according to your Supreme Court, so you should be jumping with joy.

In fact, you should be protesting all the people who do not have a weapon.

This will also boost your already exploding arms industry.

Why in the name of Ahura Mazda would we do that? We beleive in the right to not own arms as much as the right to own them.

~String

[John99]

U.S does not make AK47's.

[phlogistician]

U.S does not make AK47's.

Oh yes it does. Several companies make all the parts as spares, and offer complete AK's, made from parts sourced entirely within the US.

[phlogistician]

Some, like me, see this as a firewall against overwhelming government intrusion. All the deaths in the world won't amount to a hill of beans against a totalitarian government that cannot be toppled by a well armed public.
~String

Riiight. So when McCarthy was trampling all over 1A, where were the 2A folks waving their rifles?

Also, as the general public own handguns and rifles, and the National Guard and Army have tanks, aircraft and a whole lot more toys, and are trained to use them, I don't think the general public stand a chance in hell should there be martial law.

Just what would turn an American citizen into a cop killer anyway?

[S.A.M.]

Why in the name of Ahura Mazda would we do that? We beleive in the right to not own arms as much as the right to own them.

~String

So if everyone has a right to arms, anyone can have them, right?

Can they still arrest people for possessing a firearm? Or is that unconstitutional?