Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
Politics Of Hunting & Guns (NOT General Politics)
Gun Control Florida Shooting
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="lynxpilot" data-source="post: 1209191" data-attributes="member: 23349"><p>Theoretically (and constitutionally), neither the exec or the legislature can do anything about the 2nd Amendment. It's in the Bill of Rights and can only be interpreted by the Supreme Court, so long as when it's violated somebody sues and the SCOTUS agrees to hear.</p><p></p><p>There's a powerful propaganda campaign in progress. So long as it convinces a voting majority to disarm the public, then the next step is a constitutional convention OR the SCOTUS ruling from the bench (ha ha, never happens eh?).</p><p></p><p>I've always been perplexed as to why somebody can name a supreme court justice as being conservative or liberal. That, to me, is inane. Their entire job is interpreting the Constitution. If there's a "liberal" or "conservative" justice on the bench, then they never had any place there from the start. In reality, of course that's not realistic, but you'd think they would at least try to give the impression of "interpreting" the Constitution. Heck, our last savior (rest in peace), in his discussions of the Heller case said that 2A was not absolute and could be restricted in the number and type of arms that citizens could keep. That, to me, is a blatant violation of 2A if there ever was one. And he was the "conservative", and now he's dead.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="lynxpilot, post: 1209191, member: 23349"] Theoretically (and constitutionally), neither the exec or the legislature can do anything about the 2nd Amendment. It's in the Bill of Rights and can only be interpreted by the Supreme Court, so long as when it's violated somebody sues and the SCOTUS agrees to hear. There's a powerful propaganda campaign in progress. So long as it convinces a voting majority to disarm the public, then the next step is a constitutional convention OR the SCOTUS ruling from the bench (ha ha, never happens eh?). I've always been perplexed as to why somebody can name a supreme court justice as being conservative or liberal. That, to me, is inane. Their entire job is interpreting the Constitution. If there's a "liberal" or "conservative" justice on the bench, then they never had any place there from the start. In reality, of course that's not realistic, but you'd think they would at least try to give the impression of "interpreting" the Constitution. Heck, our last savior (rest in peace), in his discussions of the Heller case said that 2A was not absolute and could be restricted in the number and type of arms that citizens could keep. That, to me, is a blatant violation of 2A if there ever was one. And he was the "conservative", and now he's dead. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
Politics Of Hunting & Guns (NOT General Politics)
Gun Control Florida Shooting
Top