« BAF Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: About 'Gun Control' "laws" . . . 

By: Zimbler0 in BAF | Recommend this post (2)
Sat, 17 Feb 18 11:05 PM | 43 view(s)
Boardmark this board | Bash-a-Farter
Msg. 00863 of 06530
(This msg. is a reply to 00837 by zzstar)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

zzshart> There is NO INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.


Wrong again.

>>>
Supreme Court affirms fundamental right to bear arms

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062802134.html

2010

The Second Amendment provides Americans a fundamental right to bear arms that cannot be violated by state and local governments, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a long-sought victory for gun rights advocates.

The 5 to 4 decision does not strike down any gun-control laws, nor does it elaborate on what kind of laws would offend the Constitution. One justice predicted that an "avalanche" of lawsuits would be filed across the country asking federal judges to define the boundaries of gun ownership and government regulation.

But Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who wrote the opinion for the court's dominant conservatives, said: "It is clear that the Framers . . . counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty."

>>>>

(Article does continue. Zim.)




Avatar

Mad Poet Strikes Again.




» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: About 'Gun Control' "laws" . . .
By: zzstar
in BAF
Sat, 17 Feb 18 4:46 AM
Msg. 00837 of 06530

There is NO INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.
Only for militia, and that was over 200 YEARS AGO WHEN THEY HAD MUSKETS.


« BAF Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next