“Our review of more than 700 years of English and American legal history reveals a strong theme: government has the power to regulate arms in the public square,” Bybee wrote in a 7-4 decision for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Isn't it funny how they twist and contort themselves to justify the conclusion they'd already reached before even hearing the case? And nobody says, "What does a 700 year-old English law have to do with the American Bill of Rights?"
> “Our review of more than 700 years of English and American legal history reveals a strong theme: government has the power to regulate arms in the public square,” Bybee wrote in a 7-4 decision for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Isn't it funny how they twist and contort themselves to justify the conclusion they'd already reached before even hearing the case? And nobody says, "What does a 700 year-old English law have to do with the American Bill of Rights?"
(post is archived)