Sun Jul 22, 2012 at 08:46 AM PDT.
Justice Scalia and Gun Control Laws
.....
Scalia told Piers Morgan that when he decides a case he relies on the definition of words used at the time the Bill of Rights were written because the definition of words in the 1700's is what the framers relied on.
SCALIA: What I insist upon, however, is that as to the phenomenon that existed, their meaning then is the same as their meaning now.
.....
So, according to Scalia he decides the Constitutional freedoms today as those freedoms were defined "at that time" the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written.
1700's DEFINITION OF "ARMS"
In the 1700's, during the drafting of both the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution, the definition of "arms" were:
Flintlock Muskets, and pistols could only fire one shot.
Therefore, using Scalia's litmus, what "was the right [to bear arms] of Englishmen at that time?" Scalia would have to then say, the Right to Bear Arms meant and means, the right to own Flintlock Muskets and pistols that could only fire one shot.
Current laws allow anyone in the general public to go to a gun-show and buy a military-grade assault weapon without background check.
The lies the NRA uses to make billions off of the sale of assault weapons in America has to come to an end.
We the People should not have to dress our kids in riot gear just so they can go to the movies without risk of being murdered by some freak with a military grade assault weapon.
We the People, according to Scalia's litmus, do not have a Constitutional right to own high-power assault weapons nor high-power ammunition because according to Scalia We the People only have a right to own Flintlock Muskets and pistols that fire one shot.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/22/1112565/-Justice-Scalia-and-Gun-Control-Laws
DO SOMETHING!
| 
