02-20-2018, 01:44 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-20-2018, 01:52 PM by Eric the Green.)
Yes. Many believe the 2nd granted a right for a well-regulated militia member to carry a firearm. Bob says it should be interpreted according to state constitutions of the 18th century. Since times have changed, and guns have become such a danger to society, it is valid to interpret the justification clause as a qualifications clause, as was done for many decades before Heller. This danger to society is not a personal opinion, but a fact.
If the current conservative, right-wing majority on the Bush/Trump Court is updated in the future, this view may return. This might make it possible for certain localities to ban certain weapons, unless their bearers are part of a well-regulated militia, which in updated terms means the national guard and the police. Meanwhile, the Court in Heller says gun control is permitted, and that likely includes a ban on military weapons (semi-automatics).
I think that society has the right to judge someone unfit to own and carry a weapon, just as they judge someone unfit to drive a vehicle or obtain other kinds of licenses. Whether (s)he has actually been convicted of a felony or not, may not matter. If someone is behaving dangerously, including making threats, a restraining order is appropriate, and this includes restraint on the right to bear arms. Guns are for killing life; those not qualified to kill, should not have access to them.
Our unique American obsession with the unnecessary, ammosexual "right" to own and carry weapons is just one way in which the USA is backward, self-destructive and regressive today. I hope the USA can recover its bearings as the 4T reaches its climax and moves us into a new saeculum and the next 2 turnings, with the USA embracing a higher purpose and consciousness than it has had in the Reagan/Bush/Trump era. I look forward to this. Since I am a blue/green, idealistic, awakened core Boomer, I continue to nourish hope and expectation for progress, creativity and enlightenment. In this lifetime, or the next. May it be so
If the current conservative, right-wing majority on the Bush/Trump Court is updated in the future, this view may return. This might make it possible for certain localities to ban certain weapons, unless their bearers are part of a well-regulated militia, which in updated terms means the national guard and the police. Meanwhile, the Court in Heller says gun control is permitted, and that likely includes a ban on military weapons (semi-automatics).
I think that society has the right to judge someone unfit to own and carry a weapon, just as they judge someone unfit to drive a vehicle or obtain other kinds of licenses. Whether (s)he has actually been convicted of a felony or not, may not matter. If someone is behaving dangerously, including making threats, a restraining order is appropriate, and this includes restraint on the right to bear arms. Guns are for killing life; those not qualified to kill, should not have access to them.
Our unique American obsession with the unnecessary, ammosexual "right" to own and carry weapons is just one way in which the USA is backward, self-destructive and regressive today. I hope the USA can recover its bearings as the 4T reaches its climax and moves us into a new saeculum and the next 2 turnings, with the USA embracing a higher purpose and consciousness than it has had in the Reagan/Bush/Trump era. I look forward to this. Since I am a blue/green, idealistic, awakened core Boomer, I continue to nourish hope and expectation for progress, creativity and enlightenment. In this lifetime, or the next. May it be so