Active Users:771 Time:13/12/2025 02:03:37 PM
Um, no. Ghavrel Send a noteboard - 29/06/2010 06:05:37 AM
"The reasons that motivated the framers to protect the ability of militiamen to keep muskets available for military use when our nation was in its infancy, or that motivated the Reconstruction Congress to extend full citizenship to freedmen in the wake of the Civil War, have only a limited bearing on the question that confronts the homeowner in a crime-infested metropolis today."

That's from Stevens' dissent.
"We feel safe when we read what we recognise, what does not challenge our way of thinking.... a steady acceptance of pre-arranged patterns leads to the inability to question what we are told."
~Camilla

Ghavrel is Ghavrel is Ghavrel

*MySmiley*

Reply to message
SCOTUS - Affirms Gun Rights Nationwide..... - 28/06/2010 04:47:03 PM 502 Views
A good day for liberty. - 28/06/2010 04:55:01 PM 200 Views
Yeah, pretty much - 28/06/2010 05:19:15 PM 208 Views
Great point - whether you agreed with the 2nd amendment or not, its intent is clear..... - 28/06/2010 06:19:08 PM 182 Views
"well regulated militia" *NM* - 28/06/2010 11:56:54 PM 55 Views
Read the dissents, they don't focus on "well regulated militia"..... - 29/06/2010 04:28:06 AM 164 Views
Um, no. - 29/06/2010 06:05:37 AM 177 Views
yes - 29/06/2010 03:18:43 AM 180 Views
Yes. An armed polity is a defended polity. - 29/06/2010 07:13:50 PM 153 Views
Yay for bare arms! (and other parts too ) - 28/06/2010 10:03:39 PM 182 Views
Good, but I am surprised at how many people I've heard today saying stupid things like... - 29/06/2010 03:18:29 AM 190 Views
I really don't think you should be amazed. - 29/06/2010 04:14:20 PM 163 Views
Interesting on many levels. - 29/06/2010 10:27:30 AM 169 Views
Probably the right ruling. - 29/06/2010 08:30:02 PM 170 Views
~sighs~ - 30/06/2010 02:23:21 AM 159 Views
Let's be serious, plenty of supposed constitutional rights nowadays were not intended that way. - 30/06/2010 11:31:01 AM 163 Views
that is a separate discussion - 01/07/2010 05:05:27 AM 159 Views
Re: that is a separate discussion - 01/07/2010 09:31:55 AM 153 Views
My first reading of the article indicated... - 30/06/2010 02:50:33 PM 158 Views
yes, you were wrong - 01/07/2010 04:48:17 AM 154 Views

Reply to Message