Supreme Court to back right to bear arms

[Empress of Groovy 373]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

Don't forget about the importance of tanks.

[mawilson 2,133]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

Don't forget about the importance of tanks.

Who's going to use the tanks? The military? They can't use them against civilians, Posse Comitatus and all.

[Dan J 277]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

Don't forget about the importance of tanks.

Who's going to use the tanks? The military? They can't use them against civilians, Posse Comitatus and all.

Are they still civilians if they are part of an insurrection against the goverment?

[mawilson 2,133]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

Don't forget about the importance of tanks.

Who's going to use the tanks? The military? They can't use them against civilians, Posse Comitatus and all.

Are they still civilians if they are part of an insurrection against the goverment?

Yes. The federal government cannot use the military for law enforcement in the U.S.

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

We are a family that hunts so im pretty happy to hear that but more important we live in the country so if we need police at any time it can take them up to two hours to respond to our home and we had to call them before .........we have a farm and every once in awhile we get the kids that like mmm mushrooms that grow in the fields that cows are in

Do you really need a gun because of shroomers? That sounds quite bizarre to me.

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

This case is a bit ironic. Conservatives dont like activists on the supreme court. But in order to find the Washington DC law unconstitutional based on the second amendment, they have to be activists.

No, they would have to be activists to decide that they could pass a law outlawing guns. You have it backwards. The constitution clearly states that we have the right to bear arms.

You do understand that the "right to bear arms" does have limits, right? A bomb for every baby, I guess.

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

Don't forget about the importance of tanks.

Who's going to use the tanks? The military? They can't use them against civilians, Posse Comitatus and all.

Are they still civilians if they are part of an insurrection against the goverment?

Yes. The federal government cannot use the military for law enforcement in the U.S.

Go look back at the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. There were plenty of military personnel policing New Orleans.

[HAL 9000 96]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

Don't forget about the importance of tanks.

Who's going to use the tanks? The military? They can't use them against civilians, Posse Comitatus and all.

Are they still civilians if they are part of an insurrection against the goverment?

Yes. The federal government cannot use the military for law enforcement in the U.S.

Go look back at the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. There were plenty of military personnel policing New Orleans.

Heck wasn't Mexico's military allowed to help as well? Yes, I think it was true.

Besides... that's what the National Guard is for...

[AnewKINDofFEELIN 0]

Also, the Civil War is a pretty good indication of what the military can do to US "civilians."

[desert_fox 32]

Yes. The federal government cannot use the military for law enforcement in the U.S.

There are a few exceptions...general insurections, etc.

I remeber whe Pres Johnson called out fed troops to quell racial riots in Detroit years ago.

[desert_fox 32]

Go look back at the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. There were plenty of military personnel policing New Orleans.

Those were National Guard troops that are under the control of the State Governor. They are not federalo govt troops.

[GaryC 7]

This case is a bit ironic. Conservatives dont like activists on the supreme court. But in order to find the Washington DC law unconstitutional based on the second amendment, they have to be activists.

No, they would have to be activists to decide that they could pass a law outlawing guns. You have it backwards. The constitution clearly states that we have the right to bear arms.

You do understand that the "right to bear arms" does have limits, right? A bomb for every baby, I guess.

Limit yes, outright ban like the DC law, no.

[SaadBell 0]

MYTH: Keeping guns in the home increases personal protection.

TRUTH: Obviously, self defense is not a good argument against gun control since those who own firearms are actually more likely to be victims of homicide. Two studies published in The New England Journal of Medicine revealed that keeping a gun in the home increases the risk of both suicide and homicide. Keeping a gun in the home makes it 2.7 times more likely that someone will be a victim of homicide in your home (in almost all cases the victim is either related to or intimately acquainted with the murderer) (source) and 4.8 times more likely that someone will commit suicide (source). Guns make it more likely that a suicide attempt will be successful than if other means were used such as sleeping pills.

Who are you scared off? We can always go back to the wild west days, and we just all carry around guns, and if someone makes you mad, just shoot them.

[Scott & Lai 12]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

Don't forget about the importance of tanks.

Who's going to use the tanks? The military? They can't use them against civilians, Posse Comitatus and all.

Are they still civilians if they are part of an insurrection against the goverment?

Yes. The federal government cannot use the military for law enforcement in the U.S.

Go look back at the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. There were plenty of military personnel policing New Orleans.

Speaking of Katrina, many of the police had fled. And then the police commissioner decided to forcibly confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens, depriving them of the means to protect themselves and their property from looters and thugs.

[SaadBell 0]

I like this idea even better