2nd Amendment Challenge -- DC v. Heller

[Wally]

AMoore wrote:

Be careful of which amendment you want to attack, one you firmly believe in could be next.
Wally

Translation: Don't attack ones right to own a gun because it could lead to an attack on a right you value.


I would hate to think that anyone would ever abstain from speaking out against a policy or issue in the hopes that nobody else speaks out against a differerent policy or issue. Being able to speak out agaisnt policy is what makes this country great!

This country has the oldest constitution in the world because it breathes. Ironically, the Second Amendment was adopted because of the fear people had against tyranny. Tyranny, of course, results in the supression of the right to speak out against that which we disagree with.

Aaron, You speak of "policy". I am speaking of constitutional right. The best government is the one that fears its people, not the other way around. If we repeal the Second Amendment and then the First, Fourth etc., what redress do the people have to restore their right's. If you don't like firearms or the fact that others may own them, that is fine, express your views. But don't suggest that there should be a modification or repeal of a right we all hold to suit your beliefs. Every firearm sold through a dealer since 1968 has been registered Federaly. To make people jump through hoops to exercise a right smacks of tyranny. We now have the Patriot Act, what could be next? I do not live in fear, I want to exercise ALL my right's as long as they don't interfere with others right's.