- Thread starter
- #6,741
Any time Congress gets to decide who has rights and who doesn't, it becomes subject to the will of the party in power. Any Congressional restriction or executive order would likely be overturned by SCOTUS.So, what did “well-regulated” mean circa 1787?This statement: The point you didn't address though is who decides if a militia is "well regulated."
It meant, simply, well-trained and equipped.
The entire U.S. population cannot — cannot — be a well regulated militia. “well-regulated” is stated BEFORE "right of the People" means properly functioning mind that is well trained. That does not include emotionally unstable people, mentally ill, illegal aliens, criminals, the untrained, etc.
There will never be enough police to protect us or keep guns out of the hands of unfit people. Government needs to publish a list of mentally ill, illegal aliens, criminals, emotionally unstable people & the untrained so average citizens can read to find if people they see with guns are on there, just like they can look at a registered sex offender list.
The problem is who sets the standard for mentally ill and unstable? Many on the left aren't willing to call someone here that shouldn't be here illegal. They're referred to as undocumented and those same people don't consider what they did as a crime.
This is not a problem. Congress just needs to grow some balls & set the standards for the list. Or we could have a list of people who qualify to own or carry a gun, as long as it does no state if we actually own any, how many.
THEY have the ultimate power though.
Let's say a democrat appoints 3 Supreme Court justices. The individual right to bear arms is threatened and Heller might be overturned. You'd love that, I suppose, but what if a Conservative gets to pick the next 3 justices? Wave goodbye to Roe V Wade.
Yep. Sadly the Supreme Court is just the politically driven American Politburo now imposing the will of their political party