Political Irony

4 Comments

1. westomoon wrote:

   Wow, the framing on this has been so thoroughly hijacked for so long, I have always thought of it to mean modern firearms. But at the time of its writing, what “arms” meant to the authors was swords and cumbersome, single-shot firearms and cannon.

   As to the disappeared half of this amendment, the “orderly militia” which justifies the right to bear arms — I am so old that I remember when every city had something called an Armory, public buildings where presumably those orderly militias kept their Second-Amendment gear. I wonder how and when that concept died.

   Monday, August 11, 2014 at 9:21 am | Permalink
2. Xuuths wrote:

   That liberal, Justice Scalia, wrote in the majority opinion:

   “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

   Monday, August 11, 2014 at 10:43 am | Permalink
3. Iron Knee wrote:

   Who nominated that bleeding heart liberal anyway?

   Monday, August 11, 2014 at 10:47 am | Permalink
4. Max wrote:

   Here’s the irony: the second amendment was originally intended to limit the federal government’s power over the states. But now the Supreme Court is using it to impose a national gun policy. And this new policy is being implemented by a constitutional “originalist”!

   Tuesday, August 12, 2014 at 2:37 am | Permalink