- Aug 4, 2009
- 281,097
- 140,441
- 2,300
The question at hand is ……Is Gun Registration Constitutional?The Supreme Court has ruled you DO NOT have to be a member of a militia in order to own firearms.
Supreme Court strikes down 2nd Amendment, citing National Guard marksmanship
"Seriously, have you seen them shoot?”www.duffelblog.com
WASHINGTON — In a stunning precedent-breaking case, the Supreme Court has overturned the militia clause of the 2nd Amendment, citing poor National Guard weapons skills.
“For over 200 years, the right to ‘keep and bear arms as part of a well-ordered militia’ has stood in the 2nd amendment,” said Chief Justice John G. Roberts in a rare 9-0 opinion.
“This court debated if that clause limits gun ownership to just members of the militia, or the National Guard as it’s now called, or if all Americans have the right to keep and bear arms. Given recent information, this court sees that the framers were exactly wrong. This court ruled that literally, anyone but the militia should have the right to firearms because seriously, have you seen them shoot?”
Roberts added that if he wanted to see a shot group like that, he’d throw rice at a sticky rat trap.
Now for a serious link …
District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitutionprotects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and requirement that lawfully owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee.[1] It also stated that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated. It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense or whether the right was intended for state militias.[2]
Because of the District of Columbia's status as a federal enclave (it is not in any U.S. state), the decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment's protections are incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution against the states.[3] This point was addressed two years later by McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), in which it was found that they are.
The second amendment says it is
