RiverRat
Well-known member
I’m sure everyone knows this, but just a reminder… The US Supreme Court is scheduled to begin hearing argument TOMORROW (March 18, 2008) on the meaning of the second amendment.
This is actually coming up because of an individual wanting to have a gun for protection. As I see it, though, this will give platform for the age-old debate argued by anti-gun activists that the right to bear arms is not an individual's right, but is the collective right of a group, or “militia”.
This will be the first case before the Supreme Court since 1939 over gun control laws.
However they want to spin it, the bottom line is that our founding fathers wanted to provide us with a means of defending and protecting ourselves.
The second amendment:
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
If you are interested in seeing the representation there for both sides, here's a link:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/07-290.htm
DT
This is actually coming up because of an individual wanting to have a gun for protection. As I see it, though, this will give platform for the age-old debate argued by anti-gun activists that the right to bear arms is not an individual's right, but is the collective right of a group, or “militia”.
This will be the first case before the Supreme Court since 1939 over gun control laws.
However they want to spin it, the bottom line is that our founding fathers wanted to provide us with a means of defending and protecting ourselves.
The second amendment:
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
If you are interested in seeing the representation there for both sides, here's a link:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/07-290.htm
DT