• norbert
    link
    fedilink
    2
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I get it, you’re an individualist, you won’t find me arguing against an individuals right to own guns; however I disagree with your analysis. Your interpretation of “infringed” seems to be “anything preventing.” Well-regulated in the context of the 2nd amendment implies the imposition of proper training and discipline. This has actually already been decided.

    DC v. Heller (which ruled on the individual right to bear arms in 2008) states:
    Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose

    • BaldProphet
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      It’s not my interpretation of “infringed”. It’s the Merriam-Webster definition of the word.

      • norbert
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Laws in the US aren’t written by Merriam-Webster, if they were we’d have a lot fewer cases as lawyers wouldn’t argue the meaning of words.

        The Supreme Court has ruled the 2nd amendment is not carte Blanche to own whatever you like. You’re like a typical republican, absolutely unwilling to compromise or meet in the middle. It’s your way or the highway. Let’s see how that works out for you over the next few decades.