|
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:
Are Stun Guns, Well, Guns Protected By The Second Amendment?
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Supreme Court agreed with her. It smacked down the Massachusetts decision. Specifically, the Supreme Court set aside the state court ruling and sent the case back to the Massachusetts court “for further proceedings not inconsistent with [its] opinion.”
Now, if you’re wondering how the eight justices currently on the Supreme Court voted, we’ll never know. It was an unsigned opinion without full written or oral arguments. The Court did, however, refer to its landmark 2008 decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, as it ruled that the Second Amendment applies “to all instruments that constitute bearable arms,” even those not in existence at the time of the founding. |
Comment by:
mickey
(4/7/2016)
|
Dear NRA: The Second Amendment to the Constitution does not protect guns, in fact neither of the words "gun" nor "guns" can be found anywhere in the text of the Constitution.
The 2A protects our right to keep and bear arms, not guns. In a military sense, that includes all the 'terrible implements' of a soldier. As Judge Alito has written, it also includes weapons not designed for military use. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
You are bound to meet misfortune if you are unarmed because, among other reasons, people despise you....There is simply no comparison between a man who is armed and one who is not. It is unreasonable to expect that an armed man should obey one who is unarmed, or that an unarmed man should remain safe and secure when his servants are armed. In the latter case, there will be suspicion on the one hand and contempt on the other, making cooperation impossible. — Niccolo Machiavelli in "The Prince." |
|
|