cold dead hands
Moderator
In light of the ruling that guns are an individual right, but "reasonable" restrictions still apply I wonder if we really won.
Who gets to decide what is reasonable?
I am very egalitarian about guns and think only violent or mentally ill people shouldn't have them (and if they are that dangerous then they need to be removed from society). Everyone else is fair game to me. And you may walk the street without a permit. Open or concealed. Your choice. I consider that to be reasonable.
On the other end of the spectrum there are those who think that you should jump through hoops and wade through knee deep red tape in order to own a gun, and you can forget about any kind of carry permit. Open carry only if you are in the woods hunting. To them this is reasonable.
And...seeing as how it was far from being a unanimous decision (one vote in our favor to make it 5 to 4...ouch...talk about skin of the teeth) I wonder if this is permanent or a slight reprieve until more "liberal" judges can strip us of our inherent rights and completely ignore precedent as well as the 2A?
How far will states and cities go to find other ways to create de facto bans?
Did the ruling also cover ammunition? A gun with out ammo is a metal stick or a paper weight.
Did we really win?
I usually see a glass as both half empty as well as full, but not this time. I believe that we aren't any closer to victory as gun owners. We were given a pithy ruling that would assuage us in our cries for an honest upholding of the 2A. We still do not have what the Founding Fathers wanted us to have and SCOTUS knows it.
We are still just as infringed as before the ruling.
Did we really win?
I say no.
What say you?
Who gets to decide what is reasonable?
I am very egalitarian about guns and think only violent or mentally ill people shouldn't have them (and if they are that dangerous then they need to be removed from society). Everyone else is fair game to me. And you may walk the street without a permit. Open or concealed. Your choice. I consider that to be reasonable.
On the other end of the spectrum there are those who think that you should jump through hoops and wade through knee deep red tape in order to own a gun, and you can forget about any kind of carry permit. Open carry only if you are in the woods hunting. To them this is reasonable.
And...seeing as how it was far from being a unanimous decision (one vote in our favor to make it 5 to 4...ouch...talk about skin of the teeth) I wonder if this is permanent or a slight reprieve until more "liberal" judges can strip us of our inherent rights and completely ignore precedent as well as the 2A?
How far will states and cities go to find other ways to create de facto bans?
Did the ruling also cover ammunition? A gun with out ammo is a metal stick or a paper weight.
Did we really win?
I usually see a glass as both half empty as well as full, but not this time. I believe that we aren't any closer to victory as gun owners. We were given a pithy ruling that would assuage us in our cries for an honest upholding of the 2A. We still do not have what the Founding Fathers wanted us to have and SCOTUS knows it.
We are still just as infringed as before the ruling.
Did we really win?
I say no.
What say you?