Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Other Side" data-source="post: 2247315" data-attributes="member: 17969">Why not trying to read the SCOTUS ruling in Heller V DC and find out for yourself, eh??The scotus ruled that a HANDGUN could be kept in the home for home protection and made it very clear that any other weapons could be BANNED by the States if they chose to do so as they were not a protected priviledge under the second amendment.From SCALIA himself and his majority RULING on the second amendment....&quot;&nbsp; Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students’ Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884). Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.26&quot;&quot; ~ScaliaPretty clear language.&nbsp; The laws will stand.TOS.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Other Side, post: 2247315, member: 17969"] Why not trying to read the SCOTUS ruling in Heller V DC and find out for yourself, eh?? The scotus ruled that a HANDGUN could be kept in the home for home protection and made it very clear that any other weapons could be BANNED by the States if they chose to do so as they were not a protected priviledge under the second amendment. From SCALIA himself and his majority RULING on the second amendment.... " Like most rights, the right secured by [B][SIZE=6]the Second Amendment is not unlimited[/SIZE][/B]. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained[B][SIZE=6] that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose[/SIZE][/B]. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students’ Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884). Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment ,[B][SIZE=6] nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms[/SIZE][/B].26""[B] ~Scalia[/B] Pretty clear language. The laws will stand. TOS. [/QUOTE]

Verification