Repeal the 2nd AmendmentRead the rest of the editorial here. Interestingly, the majority of the (seemingly hundreds) of comments appear to support the individual-rights view affirmed by the high Court. At least, that's my sense of the ones I read.
No, we don’t suppose that’s going to happen any time soon. But it should.
The 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is evidence that, while the founding fathers were brilliant men, they could have used an editor.
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 the founders had limited themselves to the final 14 words, the amendment would have been an unambiguous declaration of the right to possess firearms. But they didn’t and it isn’t. The amendment was intended to protect the authority of the states to organize militias. The inartful wording has left the amendment open to public debate for more than 200 years. But in its last major decision on gun rights, in 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously found that that was the correct interpretation.
On Tuesday, five members of the court edited the 2nd Amendment. In essence, they said: Scratch the preamble, only 14 words count. (Click here to read the full decision)
In doing so, they have curtailed the power of the legislatures and the city councils to protect their citizens.
Motorcycle maintenance attains nirvana? - Robert M. Pirsig, author of the 1974 cult classic book 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance', has died. The New York Post reports: In the nearly...
7 hours ago