Quote:
Originally Posted by ProdigyDub
You are correct. Constitutional rights are subject to subordination to various legitimate government interests. In each instance, there's a balancing test that goes on between our constitutional right and the government's interest. In the scenario you've described, the government has a legitimate interest in protecting drunk assholes from shooting other drunk assholes at a bar, and that interest supersedes our rights under the 2nd.
And, of course, that sort of balancing test applies to all of our Constitutional rights, not just the right to bear arms. The right to free speech aside, you can't yell "I have a bomb" at the airport, because the government has an interest in prohibiting that sort of conduct.
|
Correct and pointed out above where I mentioned Dodge City and the confication of revolvers at the door of saloons...
But, the "balancing test" cannot be construed to completely remove the right to own and bear arms such as what was in place for over 30 years in Washington DC.
We will still have "balancing tests" and regulations. But, we will not have bans anymore...