|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Our view: Heller ruling could be used in ‘sensitive’ locations
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Supreme Court decision which opened the door to allow almost any American to own firearms specifically stated that the Second Amendment does not prohibit laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in “sensitive” places. In the District of Columbia vs. Heller in 2008, the court ruled 5-4 that citizens have the right to possess firearms even when not in a state militia, and people can use them for lawful purposes, which include self-defense in their homes, according to Britannica.com. |
| Comment by:
hisself
(9/2/2020)
|
So, 5 unelected judges, have decided that "Shall not be infringed" actually means that my G-d-given rights can be infringed, and that the authors did not mean what was so clearly written.
|
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| As an individual, I believe, very strongly, that handguns should be banned and that there should be stringent, effective control of other firearms. However, as a judge, I know full well that the question of whether handguns can be sold is a political one, not an issue of products liability law, and that this is a matter for the legislatures, not the courts. The unconventional theories advanced in this case (and others) are totally without merit, a misuse of products liability laws. — Judge Buchmeyer, Patterson v. Gesellschaft, 1206 F.Supp. 1206, 1216 (N.D. Tex. 1985) |
|
|
