|
|
|
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:
Kavanaugh, Trump's Supreme Court Pick, Could Trigger Shift on Guns
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
With the addition of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court could have a conservative majority to strike down bans on semiautomatic weapons in liberal states and to decree that law-abiding Americans have a right to carry a gun in public.
Although the fight over Kavanaugh's nomination has mostly focused on abortion and health care, President Donald Trump's second nominee to the court could have a rapid impact on the national debate over gun control _ a topic the high court repeatedly has avoided wading into in recent years. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/20/2018)
|
Kavanaugh is correct, and the rest of the "conservative" jurists are not.
"[T]he enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table." - Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in D.C. v. Heller (2008)
That's a clear and succinct statement of the controlling interest on this issue. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
