• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Is Justice Scalia Right?

HandyHamlet

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
2,772
Location
Terra, Sol
Yes justice scalia is right

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.

Yes, government should have the power to ban any hand-held weapon that goes around menacing unsuspecting citizens.

I personally would be greatly unnerved by any hand-held weapon that can move about on it's own. Let alone menace stuff.
 
Last edited:

GreenCountyPete

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2009
Messages
145
Location
Green County, Wisconsin, USA
no robot or artificial intelligence device should ever be armed

while no law abiding citizen should ever be barred the use of arms

and no law should be made seeking to make law abiding gun owners criminals

guns never have been or ever were the problem , people are and will be with or without guns , the gun is however a great equalizer and should remain so , allowing a frail or weak victim to fend of an attacker many times their size.
 

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
Shocked or Surprised or...

I was surprised to hear Justice Scalia on the topic of gun control, kinda like advocation more 'gun control' or prohibition?? I am shocked actually by the undertones of this conservative justice. I think he may be talking a bit out of emotions.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/scalia-guns-may-be-regulated-20120729


Did you actually hear Justice Scalia or are you reacting to a journal article that printed the author's interpretations of what he was told by somebody who read about the interview?

Of course firearms are subject to restrictions. Everything we do is subject to some sort of restriction. Of the substantive comments he made consider - The right to keep and bear arms does not include a cannon because nobody in 1791 bore a cannon (carried it around) nor today - except perhaps Superman. He went on to say that a manpack rocket launcher may be okay because it is capable of being borne. I think that any crew served weapon is excluded because it is not designed to be an individual weapon. Thus M-60/M-2 machine guns - no, AK47/M16/other rifle (even if select fire) - perhaps. What matters is what the authors wrote and the context of the time in which they wrote. Except for the given examples, he was pretty non-committal.
 

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
can any of you wise guys explain the substance and the meaning of the second amendment in it's original intent? Also what was the purpose of the second amendment? Then please explain when regulations stop and prohibitions begin. Not only that but what did the founders mean by arms and bearing arms. Obummer could say, arms means BB guns. I never said that we need to carry bazookas or grenade launchers or cannons around. What is a WELL REGULATED militia? people like us toting guns around for self defense? I just want to understand the "right of the people to keep and bear arms. :question::question::question:
 
Last edited:
Top