View Single Post
Old 06-26-2008, 09:23 PM   #23
wmbwinn
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Midwest
Posts: 2,043
wmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud ofwmbwinn has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chumdawg
Alito's clever phrasing notwithstanding, I'm afraid I don't understand the point. What do handguns have to do with killing game?
There is an arguement that the second amendment only applies to militias. This arguement states that the second amendment only provides for weapons for military purposes.

Alito is pointing out that that arguement is silly. The dissent opinion and the petitioner's opinion both point to maintaining a right to own a gun to go hunting. Alito is saying that you can't have it both ways. You can't say that it is ok to own guns to hunt and then say that the second amendment only applies to military weapon needs.
__________________
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -Thomas Jefferson
wmbwinn is offline   Reply With Quote