> tBone wrote: > No it means we have patently unconstitutional laws on the books. >
The best legal minds in the country have been looking at this for decades and we've never come to a conclusion. Why? Because, IMO, the constitution is, at best, unclear about your arms rights. The bottom line is if you'd like to be able to unambiguously and constitutionally own guns you're going to have to get an amendment passed. But if you tried to do that, then you'd have to explicitly call out all the regulations (automatic weapons, armor piecing bullets, rocket launchers, etc). And that's exactly why SCOTUS hasn't ruled on this yet, and probably still won't. If they're smart. Alternatively they can try to rule on it. If they do that they'll force the next court to ban guns entirely. Which will force the next court to un-ban them. Solution? LEAVE. IT. UP. TO. THE. STATES. It's amazing how often that 232 year old idea comes up. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:256807 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
