It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
www.nationaljournal.com...
Justice Antonin Scalia, one of the Supreme Court's most vocal and conservative justices, said on Sunday that the Second Amendment leaves room for U.S. legislatures to regulate guns, including menacing hand-held weapons.
"It will have to be decided in future cases," Scalia said on Fox News Sunday. But there were legal precedents from the days of the Founding Fathers that banned frightening weapons which a constitutional originalist like himself must recognize. There were also "locational limitations" on where weapons could be carried, the justice noted.
Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
I do not think conservative Scalia is threatening is this article, but rather warning people this will be coming down the pike.
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.[8]
Originally posted by antonia
Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
I do not think conservative Scalia is threatening is this article, but rather warning people this will be coming down the pike.
en.wikipedia.org...
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.[8]
A warning? No, it's common sense. The third word is "regulated", therefore the federal government has that right. It's plain as day if you can read. If you don't like it then the wording needs to be changed.
Originally posted by michaelbrux
nothing to worry about because no one in Congress is going to engage in this discussion right now.
if the White House drafts legislation, Congress would wipe its ass with it, considering that they don't like Obama.
The Judges don't write laws...so its going to have to wait until Congress decides to discuss the issue.
the only thing clear to me is that the debate about gun control over the short and intermediate term is a dead issue.
i'd give it about 10-15 years.
Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
I dont believe it was legal to carry (at least not without a permit) a gun into a Colorado theatre. Even if they had a sign (no exception even for CCW holders) and a metal detector at the theatre entrance it still would not have prevented the massacre. Even if they outlawed cell phones so that the accomplice could not have received the call to open the door how would you enforce it and even if you could he could have opened the door without a phone call at a predetermined time. WHAT WE NEED IS MENTAL HEALTH (PERSONS) CONTROL AND CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENT (INCLUDING SHADOW GOVERNMENT) TO ELIMINATE FALSE FLAG ATTACKS ON OUR OWN PEOPLE. THE LAST TWO ELEMENTS WOULD COVER ALL BASES HERE (OVERT AND COVERT CAUSES).
A warning? No, it's common sense. The third word is "regulated", therefore the federal government has that right. It's plain as day if you can read. If you don't like it then the wording needs to be changed.