BMEWS
 

Heller Decision Released

 
 


Posted by Drew458    United States   on 06/26/2008 at 10:22 AM   
 
  1. What are our friends at ATF going to loophole whth this decision?

    Posted by pete_nd    United States   06/26/2008  at  01:11 PM  

  2. Have to wait and see. In the meantime, I suggest ALL of us take the time and go and read the entire decision, including the dissenting opinions. And then think about it, honestly think about it, and try to grasp it. Then go and read what other people have said. This is too important a decision to go spouting off about half cocked. Which I know I’ve done sometimes!

    Yes, there are parts in there that will bore you to death, but this is important. And I hope you have a bit of grounding in logic and grammer, or else you may be lost.

    Right now we’re reading through it, and we’re at the point where the majority opinion is tearing apart Steven’s dissent (page 19). The “level of granularity” here is microscopic, and is supported by example after example after example after example ... because there is no common sense anymore, and it takes many blows to drive the titanium spike of reality through the iron skulls of the willfully blind to let in the light of reason. So the reading is not easy, but it is just about your duty to read the whole thing and try and understand it. And it’s 157 pages long. Yoiks!

    Posted by Drew458    United States   06/26/2008  at  01:29 PM  

  3. Ha ha!! Stevens is getting a bitch slapping!!

    “Faced with this clear historical usage, JUSTICE STEVENS resorts to the bizarre argument that because the word “to” is not included before“bear” (whereas it is included before “petition” in the First Amendment), the unitary meaning of “to keep and bear” is established. ...We have never heard of the proposition that omitting repetition of the “to” causes two verbs with different meanings to become one. A promise “to support and to defend the Constitution ofthe United States” is not a whit different from a promise “to supportand defend the Constitution of the United States.””

    You go Antonin. You go brotha.

    Posted by Drew458    United States   06/26/2008  at  01:37 PM  

  4. Scalia is what we need another 4 of. Those 4, you know. This should have been 9-0 our favor. But it’s a start. Wrote about it at my place, short blurb. cool grin Let’s get on with this. War isn’t over, but we’ve got a solid foot-hold. cool smirk

    Posted by cmblake6    United States   06/26/2008  at  04:43 PM  

  5. I am so glad this case happened before we have a -D in the white house appointing liberal judges.

    Posted by John C    United States   06/26/2008  at  07:36 PM  

  6. Cm is right - this is just the foothold.

    As I’ve said many times before, the proper decision would have been “what part of shall not be infringed don’t you understand?” and that would be that. But that isn’t what we got.

    Every citizen, armed if they wish, in any way, at any time, anywhere. That’s what the Second really means. And no government, from the Federal all the way down to a Condo Association, has the ability to do jack shit about it. Without due process of course.

    Yeah yeah, we’d have “the Wild West” for a while. Which means what exactly? That we’d all live by the Cowboy Code? Like that’s a bad thing? Oh, I know. It means the irresponsible dirtbags would shoot each other left and right over nothing, and quickly remove themselves from the population? Gee, like that’s a bad thing too?

    Crime would fall to just about nothing. Try robbing a bank when every one of the 50 customers inside has a gun in their pocket, as well as all 20 of the employees plus the security guards. Ain’t gonna happen. Unless the crooks band together into brigade size gangs ... at which point we have the militia. Which is all of us citizens. Remember always that we do not have the ability to take the law into our own hands, because the People have always been the law. The law can not be removed from our hands. We The People. That’s what it really means.

    Posted by Drew458    United States   06/26/2008  at  09:02 PM  

  7. Just think...the Islamofacists will not like this either...because we can ALL be armed and take them out!

    Posted by Macker    United States   06/26/2008  at  11:42 PM  

  8. China said something about a gun behind every blade of grass, or some such. That is why they’d never invade.
    Drews post #7 is brilliant as well! Chlorine in the gene pool! “Castle Doctrine” amplified.

    Posted by cmblake6    United States   06/27/2008  at  02:37 AM  

  9. Yeah, not to mention Adm Yamamoto spoke of awakening a sleeping giant. The libtards don’t realize how close THEY came to awakening the giant. And I’ve been corrected, it was Japan that said the gun behind every blade of grass thing. Two very good examples of their military savvy!

    Posted by cmblake6    United States   06/28/2008  at  01:58 AM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next entry: Speaking of guns ... some bad news?

Previous entry: what the heck

<< BMEWS Main Page >>