It was widely agreed within minutes of the two latest gun
massacres that they would change nothing in the gun debate.
But on Monday the U.S. Supreme effectively reversed earlier
rulings and allowed an Illinois law banning semi-automatic weapons.
Obviously the court was reacting to shootings in the past
two weeks. Instead it means it was studying them even before the latest blood.
The way it was done, by refusing to hear a court appeal,
limited what the court said about the matter.
Gun rights’ supporter Clarence Thomas said the
decision amounted relegating the Second Amendment to a second-class right.”
Thomas claimed the overwhelming majority of
automatic gun owners Thomas used them
lawfully.
The 7th Court in Illinois said only
nine That means banning these rifles would not interfere with the rights of gun
owners.
In other words, as with many constitutional
amendments, they are not without limit.
Thirty-nine states allow the sale of these guns.
Caifornia, one which disapproves them, fears killers can enter into another
state and buy the guns.
The new decision may encourage to find more
cracks.
The gun lobby is already losing another battle:
the word war.
Media has been referring to assault style rifles
as long rifles, a term meant to describe an old-fashioned Kentucky rifle. It
was feared calling them assault rifles would be seen as prejudiced.
Change may be on the way.
Politico reported: "Four times between 1876 and 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to rule that the Second Amendment protected individual gun ownership outside the context of a militia."
It said the 2nd amendment was one of a total of 17 introduced by James Madison. What happened to the other ones.
Politico reported: "Four times between 1876 and 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to rule that the Second Amendment protected individual gun ownership outside the context of a militia."
It said the 2nd amendment was one of a total of 17 introduced by James Madison. What happened to the other ones.
No comments:
Post a Comment