« AP on Parker -- gets almost everything wrong | Main | Government files amicus -- on DC's side! »
Amici for DC online
Right here.
2 Comments | Leave a comment
aMERICANS WERE HARDLY SHY ABOUT IDENTIFYING AND DISCUSSING SUCH FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AS REPRESENTATION, TRIAL BY JURY, OR FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE, OR THE NATURAL RIGHTS TO LIFE, LIBERTY, AND PROPERTY. tHE FACT THAT REFERENCES TO THE KEEPING OF FIREARMS ARE SO FEW AND TERSE, OR THAT THE MODERN ACADEMIC CONTROVERSY OVER THE sECOND aMENDMENT HAS BEEN FORCED TO SQUEEZE SO MUCH MODERN INTERPRETIVE BLOOD FROM SO FEW EVIDENTIARY TURNIPS, IS ITSELF AN INDICATOR OF HOW MINOR A QUESTION THIS WAS AT THE TIME.
Perhaps the simpler and more accurate conclusion would be that gun ownership wasn't debated because it fit under property ownership and it wasn't conceived to be something the govt could take away.
This can't be Kosher.
"The States continued to regulate after the Second
Amendment’s adoption. In the early 1800s, Kentucky
and Louisiana banned the carrying of concealed weapons.
Everybody who knows the history of concealed weapons laws knows the Kentucky court found those laws unconstitutional. A significant fact left out in the statement and premise. I thought Rabbi's and Pastor's and Priests weren't supposed to lie? It's amazing who is willing to sell their souls these days