Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
Well, the "well-regulated" part kills that argument. The "population of able-bodied men" is not "well-regulated".

Why not? You can have regulations of the population of able-bodied men that come into play when they are summoned to active duty.

However, even given that blatantly incorrect interpretation by Scalia, NY has not forbade ownership of firearms. You can exercise that right all you like in your home. So I think NY should prevail.

Again, the argument is that the right is to "keep and bear" arms. It's not just ownership - it's also use. Does being able to use a gun only in your home fully allow the exercise of the right, or does the right encompass something broader? We certainly would not accept that for some other rights - if the state prohibited exercising the right to free speech except in your private home, or to religious exercise, that would certainly violate the First Amendment.

Albaby
Print the post  

Announcements

What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.