Supreme Court to weigh whether 2nd Amendment gives citizens right to carry in public

Originally published at: Supreme Court to weigh whether 2nd Amendment gives citizens right to carry in public | Boing Boing

2 Likes

They sure don’t look like members of a well-regulated militia to me.

(ducks)

28 Likes

Gee, I wonder how the court will go on this? I mean, sure, this would carve out a new right, and conservatives hate activist courts . . . .

31 Likes

C’mon, you know that if the Court makes a decision the Right likes, they’re affirming a right. It’s only liberal opinions that carve out new rights.

(Big ol’ /s)

30 Likes

“I feel my life is in danger, your honor. There are people carrying guns everywhere.”

42 Likes

More guns equals more deaths, let alone more guns in public. Period.

Fuck this “self-defense” BS.

Pack the court, Uncle Joe.

44 Likes

The problem is that the 2nd amendment is broad and/or vague, and was written when guns were single shot and took time to reload. With that in mind it’s impossible to interpret the framers intent.

14 Likes

I’m just waiting for all the people who are all about those State’s Rights to come out and call out the Supreme Court for this!

crickets Hum, that’s weird…

22 Likes

The founders intended to perpetuate slavery. Fuck the founders.

27 Likes

The party of States’ rights, eh?

15 Likes

It’s kinda like “Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the rest of us.”

Pointing out the straight up, blatant hypocrisy of the right has never stopped them from inflicting all kinds of damage.

Instead of merely pointing out yet another logical inconsistency, we need to fight back. Hard.

25 Likes

So-called “Originalists” try to do just that. Even accepting that approach, those conservatives aren’t the interpreters of the framers they claim to be. Taking historical context and definitions of terms into account, it’s reasonable to assume that the framers were talking about allowing for well-drilled and-trained state national guard units that could be called up to defend the country and its system of government.

This as opposed to giving the right to carry around loaded firearms in the streets and into Applebee’s to a bunch of untrained yahoos, white supremacists, and obsessive collectors who are insecure about their masculinity. Or treating the Second Amendment as the main document’s “suicide clause”. This is the politically expedient (and cherry-picking and intellectually dishonest ) position of Scalia’s and the Federalist Society’s “Originalism” position about firearms. Unfortunately, it has a good chance of winning here.

18 Likes

39 Likes

If you’re very rich, there are ways around that.

10 Likes

Make America Wild West Again

gunfight

Sponsored by your neighborhood gun lobby.

16 Likes

You do know that there are other competing better, ways of constitutional interpretation? Ossifying an elderly document makes it more and more inappropriate.

If they make this ridiculous white privilege an overriding “right” I will not go to the US again. Gun ownership and menacing with them are not a right.

My right not to be in fear of armed thugs is a right.

17 Likes

Oh. I’m sure that they will make sure only “the right” kinds of people can carry.

15 Likes

P.S. carrying a gun around on “open carry” meets the common law definition of assault.

Magna fucking Carta my arse MagaMotherfuckers.

15 Likes

America is the only country that recognizes your god-given right to get shot while minding your own business. Plus, they charge a fortune for emergency medical care when (not if) you do get shot. Truly a shining city on a hill.

16 Likes

The LAPD says, “good cause exists if there is convincing evidence of a clear and present danger to life or of bodily harm” to the applicants or their families.

Generally, that clear and present danger appears to be the LAPD. :man_shrugging:

19 Likes