t the law is. You don't.
Actually the people who wrote the Constitution decided what the law is
With 5 conservative on SCOTUS,
and a continuing stream of allowing sensible gun control cases to stand,
SCOTUS is realizing the invidious effects Heller has had on the country and is walking back some of its more odious effects.
Shows why it is important to nurture the growing dissatisfaction with Trump, as relected in the electoral losses of people tring to ride on his coattails, so that the groundswell becomes a tsunami in November.
Save liberty, vote Democratic.
TUS has spent the last 230 years deciding. They get to decide what the FFs meant. You don't.
They wrote it. What they mesnt when they wrote it is what SCOTUS has spent the last 230 years deciding. They get to decide what it all means.
The following paragraph is from one of my earlier post. I put in big bold letters of what also came from the supreme court ruling of District of Columbia v. Heller decision. The NRA seems to always ignore this part of that 2008 ruling.
That decision, in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, is -- so far -- the most important decision the court has ever issued on the scope of the "right to keep and bear arms." But in that very ruling, the Court said explicitly: "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited." It went on to say just as clearly that it was not barring the government from imposing "reasonable regulation" on that right.
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban and requirement that lawfully-owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee. It was also clearly stated that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated.
Can anyone tell me why the NRA and the gun manufacturers always ignore the part of the 2008 supreme court ruling that I underlined?