Thing is, the Supreme Court in the past has more or less decided what the Second Amendment means, and it is their job -- the reason they exist -- to support the Constitution. If they decide against the right to bear arms, they defy the clear statement of the Second Amendment ("shall not be infringed") and they fail to do the very job for which they were created.
Thing is, the Supreme Court in the past has more or less decided what the Second Amendment means, and it is their job -- the reason they exist -- to support the Constitution. If they decide against the right to bear arms, they defy the clear statement of the Second Amendment ("shall not be infringed") and they fail to do the very job for which they were created.
(post is archived)