What part of the Second Amendment don’t you understand?

Kimberly Dvorak Kimberly Dvorak 7 Comments

Share

Supreme Court has taken up a Second Amendment case, the outcome will surely create changes in the way Americans are allowed to acquire firearms, what rules will be in play and what role cities and states will have in the right to own a gun.

In part the Second Amendment reads; a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Not only was this right given to all citizens of the U.S. for self-defense, but also the founding fathers wanted its citizenry to never fear their government.

The case currently before the High Court, McDonald verses Chicago, will take on the issue that states can regulate the ownership of handguns. McDonald a retired military man was stripped of his rights to own a handgun because Chicago passed stringent gun ownership rules. He is fighting back.

“It’s a basic question,” says the plaintiff Otis McDonald. “If these 12-13-year-olds can walk up and down the street with guns, I should be able to own one. I’ve paid my taxes and I have worked all my life. I have been open to governments and I’ve served my country in the Army. Why is it I can’t own a hand gun to protect my home?”

Many say this case has been a controversial issue the Supreme Court has not wanted to open for more than 200 years, but the pendulum of change is swinging in America.

The stakes are high and anyway you look at it the rules in the second Amendment will change.

Keep reading:
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m3d12-What-part-of-the-Second-Amendment-dont-you-understand

Share

Comments 7

  1. Another interesting part of this case is the “incorporation” aspect. In 2008 the Heller vs. D.C. decision stated what we all already knew…the right to keep and bear arms is an individual’s right and is not referring to the collective. Although the vote on Heller vs. D.C. was 5 to 4, even the dissenting decisions conceded that it was an individual right.

    McDonald vs. Chicago will incorporate this decision into the each of the 50 states. Let’s see if Justice Sotomayer, whose decisions did not hesitate to incorporate the First Amendment into all 50 states, will be intellectually honest enough to do the same for the Second Amendment.

    As your opinion on the Second Amendment goes, so go your opinions on all rights.

  2. Under the Second Amendment I should be allowed to own a nuke-tipped ballistic missile. I hope you Rostra folks will back me on this one.

  3. I will let the 2nd Amendment experts respond to Maassive. Yet, nuke-tipped ballistic missiles may be in violation of local zoning regulations if housed at CityBeat offices.

  4. Even if you could own it, Maassive, appointed Sheriff Gore issues CCW permits so you can’t carry it concealed. So what’s the use?

    Gore doesn’t seem to be as big a fan of the Bill of Rights as you and I. Oh, except the 5th Amendment. He likes that one.

  5. Can’t we just provoke liberals into an emotional tizzy, to physically attack us. So we can respond with elephant guns in self defense. We could scream “They are cumming right for us.” When in fact we really just need to thin their heards.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.