|
|
|
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:
The Question I Would Ask Judge Kavanaugh
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
... interpreting the arcane language of “the right to keep and bear arms” to guarantee a right to keep a working handgun in your home for self-defense. This despite ample historical evidence that a primary concern of the drafters of the Second Amendment was to quell Southern States’ concerns over federal control of the “well-regulated militia.”
Other less macho rights – the right to decide whether to have an abortion or to marry your same-sex partner – find little mention in the historical record. Scalia’s contempt for such modern notions as bodily integrity, self-determination, freedom of conscience, dignity, respect, or intimacy is echoed in the historical record against which he and his ilk would frame the Constitution. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(9/14/2018)
|
Geeeesh, will this cr@p never cease?
The second amendment guaranteed the rights of WE, THE PEOPLE.
And abortion and same sex marriage AREN'T MENTIONED AT ALL IN THE CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS.
The author is stuck in a fantasy. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
