The ORIGINAL gathering place for a merry band of Three Percenters. (As denounced by Bill Clinton on CNN!)
Monday, February 17, 2014
The First and the Second.
(Click on image for clear read. A tip of the boonie hat to reader Chris for forwarding.)
3 comments:
Anonymous
said...
A very valid point that the libs and/or hoplophobes (but I repeat myself) categorically refuse to recognize. A minor quibble though, the 2nd does not mention guns - it specifically says "arms" - which of course in the general usage of the day meant those weapons in general use by Citizens and the militia for defense of themselves, their community and the state.
When at war, would any sane people "lose" because they left a certain weapon lay unused? Of course not. That means ANY arm is valid and this protected. ALL of them.
As for the deniers, this point is already settled by their own rules. "The Second Amendment is no different." Because of the context laid bare by the dicta before it, that admission is as binding as it is broad. Because the First commands Strict Scrutiny, so too must the Second.
That's what is so funny toe about the recent 9th circus decision. It contains the money shots from heller that preclude the very infringements the panel tries to justify.
If it applies to an ink pen then it applies to a gun. If it applies to a black rifle then it applies to a bible.
Time to think hard about what "applies " huh?
Lower courts are acting like litigants right now begging the SCOTUS to create a "new" level of scrutiny Dias to defeat the point made in that picture. All in the face of the reality that the heller court already DECIDED this point by affirming what we already know. NO DIFFERENT!!!
When writing the Bill of Rights the authors said, "First let's ensure free speech and no government mandated religion." And then someone piped up and said Ooh, ooh pick me, let's ensure the government has the right to have guns," and then they all went on to continuing to list inalienable individual human rights.
3 comments:
A very valid point that the libs and/or hoplophobes (but I repeat myself) categorically refuse to recognize. A minor quibble though, the 2nd does not mention guns - it specifically says "arms" - which of course in the general usage of the day meant those weapons in general use by Citizens and the militia for defense of themselves, their community and the state.
When at war, would any sane people "lose" because they left a certain weapon lay unused? Of course not. That means ANY arm is valid and this protected. ALL of them.
As for the deniers, this point is already settled by their own rules. "The Second Amendment is no different."
Because of the context laid bare by the dicta before it, that admission is as binding as it is broad. Because the First commands Strict Scrutiny, so too must the Second.
That's what is so funny toe about the recent 9th circus decision. It contains the money shots from heller that preclude the very infringements the panel tries to justify.
If it applies to an ink pen then it applies to a gun.
If it applies to a black rifle then it applies to a bible.
Time to think hard about what "applies " huh?
Lower courts are acting like litigants right now begging the SCOTUS to create a "new" level of scrutiny Dias to defeat the point made in that picture. All in the face of the reality that the heller court already DECIDED this point by affirming what we already know. NO DIFFERENT!!!
When writing the Bill of Rights the authors said, "First let's ensure free speech and no government mandated religion." And then someone piped up and said Ooh, ooh pick me, let's ensure the government has the right to have guns," and then they all went on to continuing to list inalienable individual human rights.
Post a Comment