|
|
|
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:
Supreme Court ducks Second Amendment — for now
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
It’s not often that a nondecision is a good decision, but the Supreme Court’s ruling Monday morning that it would not decide a New York City gun case was the right call.
And, in a sense, gun control advocates dodged a legal bullet — this time. Unfortunately, the conservative members of the court signaled in dissents that they might be looking for a way to recognize a private Second Amendment right to carry a firearm in public. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(4/30/2020)
|
I have to laugh at the antis' insistence that Heller only established a right to keep a handgun for self-defense in the home.
They ignore two important words, "such as," in the holding. They weren't inserted to mean nothing. What they do mean is that keeping a gun in the home is but ONE lawful exercise. While that was the specific claim at issue, the sentence in no way limits the right to that one narrow instance; it allows that there are other lawful purposes.
And that reference should be at the top of our list of arguments. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
