The US Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a Hawaii law requiring licensed permit holders to obtain a property owner's express permission before carrying a firearm onto private property open to the...
The reality is simply that the US constitution is an outdated document that should not serve as the basis for laws in a modern country.
The argument I’ve been participating in has been about what the Second Amendment was at the time it was written. The original intent of the people who wrote it. There is only one correct interpretation of that (which is mine, BTW), and modern interpretations have absolutely fuck-all to do with it.
The original intent was to allow people to own muskets because US didn’t have a standing army. What’s there to argue? You’re just playing fantasy politics trying to guess how this law would apply to situations it wasn’t meant for.
The original intent was to allow people to own muskets because US didn’t have a standing army.
Because the founders explicitly didn’t want the US to have a standing army, explicitly to prevent the Federal government from being able to subjugate the People. That’s an important distinction.
The argument I’ve been participating in has been about what the Second Amendment was at the time it was written. The original intent of the people who wrote it. There is only one correct interpretation of that (which is mine, BTW), and modern interpretations have absolutely fuck-all to do with it.
The original intent was to allow people to own muskets because US didn’t have a standing army. What’s there to argue? You’re just playing fantasy politics trying to guess how this law would apply to situations it wasn’t meant for.
Because the founders explicitly didn’t want the US to have a standing army, explicitly to prevent the Federal government from being able to subjugate the People. That’s an important distinction.