enthalpy

Saturday, March 22, 2008


The Supreme Court heard arguments in District of Columbia v. Heller this week, which is remarkable since it's the first time since 1939 a second amendment case was tried before the court. I doubt that this decision will strike down laws banning machine guns and any type of "arms" that would require a trailer hitch to transport, but it's interesting none the less. Now for my all time favourite gun-grabber logic:
Under the lower court’s analysis, he noted, categories of weapons that would have been considered “arms” by the Second Amendment’s drafters could not be banned today. He added that it would be hard to argue that machine guns did not fall into such a category, “given that they are the standard issue weapon for today’s armed forces and the state-organized militia.”
Imagine for a moment what would happen if someone even implied that the first amendment only ensured the right to methods of free speech that were available when the Constitution was drafted. Your right to practice religion was only ensured if your religion was around before 1789 (Sorry, Mormons). It's ridiculous to think the Second Amendment doesn't protect my right to own a fully automatic weapon just because Thomas Jefferson didn't have one.



Home