It is the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the lower court's decision that the gun ban in Washington D.C. is unconstitutional. No surprise. What really gets me is that it was a 5-4 decision.
Washington D.C. law would not allow the sale, purchase, or possession of a handgun by law-abiding citizens within its city limits. Also, all long guns (rifles, shotguns) had to be rendered inoperable.
So, under the statute only criminals would be carrying guns as they have no desire to be law-abiding citizens. Great. Armed criminals. No armed citizens. That's a place I want to be.
Anybody else ever wonder why the murder rate was so high in D.C.? Well, now you know.
Also, if you owned a gun and were traveling with it in your car through D.C. and a cop pulled you over he could arrest you for illegal possession of a handgun, or rifle (if not disassembled or fitted with a trigger lock) even if you were only driving through on the freeway and had no plans to stop, or take your firearm out of the car. Anybody else feel your right to bear arms infringed yet?
Amendment Two
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
That's right INFRINGED, not removed, not abolished, not made a mockery of, INFRINGED.
When the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution and Amendments they knew that a government that takes away people's weapons takes away their power to overthrow corrupt government. Ever wonder why the Cubans never ousted Fidel? He has an army, and the army has guns; the Cubans don't have guns.
I'm all for making weapons harder for felons to get, and for reasonable regulation of machine guns. (I pay a small tax and I get to own one). But I am discouraged that 4 Supreme Court justices thought that the D.C. law was constitutional under the second amendment. I thought it was a no-brainer. Maybe it is and those 4 justices who voted down party lines gave their brains away when they joined the Socialist (Democratic) party.
At least this decision has opened the door to challenging other gun bans like Chicago's and San Francisco's. Those (and others) were filed soon after this decision was released. Hopefully, law-abiding citizens will soon have their rights returned to them.
Washington D.C. law would not allow the sale, purchase, or possession of a handgun by law-abiding citizens within its city limits. Also, all long guns (rifles, shotguns) had to be rendered inoperable.
So, under the statute only criminals would be carrying guns as they have no desire to be law-abiding citizens. Great. Armed criminals. No armed citizens. That's a place I want to be.
Anybody else ever wonder why the murder rate was so high in D.C.? Well, now you know.
Also, if you owned a gun and were traveling with it in your car through D.C. and a cop pulled you over he could arrest you for illegal possession of a handgun, or rifle (if not disassembled or fitted with a trigger lock) even if you were only driving through on the freeway and had no plans to stop, or take your firearm out of the car. Anybody else feel your right to bear arms infringed yet?
Amendment Two
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
That's right INFRINGED, not removed, not abolished, not made a mockery of, INFRINGED.
When the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution and Amendments they knew that a government that takes away people's weapons takes away their power to overthrow corrupt government. Ever wonder why the Cubans never ousted Fidel? He has an army, and the army has guns; the Cubans don't have guns.
I'm all for making weapons harder for felons to get, and for reasonable regulation of machine guns. (I pay a small tax and I get to own one). But I am discouraged that 4 Supreme Court justices thought that the D.C. law was constitutional under the second amendment. I thought it was a no-brainer. Maybe it is and those 4 justices who voted down party lines gave their brains away when they joined the Socialist (Democratic) party.
At least this decision has opened the door to challenging other gun bans like Chicago's and San Francisco's. Those (and others) were filed soon after this decision was released. Hopefully, law-abiding citizens will soon have their rights returned to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment