Still, I can summon little enthusiasm for the idea that we should retreat on the "sporting purposes" front. The Second Amendment--10% of the Bill of Rights--was not bestowed on us to protect our right to engage in sport. Thwarting would-be tyrants is hardly likely to be a fun or relaxing activity--just one that would be utterly necessary to keep our way of life.That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Spread it around?
By referring to militia-appropriate arms as "modern sporting rifles," are we not, to some degree, acquiescing to the idea of civilian ownership of firerams being limited to those that have a "sporting purpose"? [More]
Stumble it!
1 comments:
I thik that the problem is there are still people using Pre-Heller arguments and or are still afraid of what "Reasonable Restrictions" that fit into the little box that the Courts might build for the 2nd ammendment therefore they are afraid to fully enumerate the meaning of the right. Or they feel that hurting the poor delicate ears of those opposed to the real meaning of RTKBA damages the cause.
Post a Comment