I’m utterly delighted with today’s ruling that reassures my right to own a gun as many guns as I want.

I love how the 2nd Amendment is walked through, step-by-step, in this ruling.

The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms… [p. 2]

Beginning on page 6, and moreso on page 8, they carefully dissect the wording of the 2nd Amendment, showing how indeed there is no ambiguity therein.

The only opinion rendered in support is from Justice Scalia, and he writes,

But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home…. what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct. [p. 67]

Now, one thing bothers me immensely about this… And that is the fact that this was a 5-4 ruling, not a 9-0 ruling. Do you realize how close America just came to overthrowing the most incredible founding document in the history of the world? How the opinion of one man could’ve overturned what is arguably the most freedom-ensuring Amendment of that document?

I’m beginning to wonder if Justice Kennedy doesn’t just wake up and flip a coin to determine his opinions. He seemed so reasonable and right on this one; keeping with the Founders and their Intent today.

Yesterday, however, was another story. I’m sure you heard how it’s somehow unconstituional to put a raper-of-children to death, per the 8th Amendment about cruel and unusual punishment. Cruel and unusual? I say keeping these dirtbags alive, paying for their meals and cable TV is cruel and unusual punishment for their victims and the families of their victims. I don’t understand how the death penalty is cruel or unusual (though I think it has to be cruel and unusual to qualify here, in my mind). The way it’s done today, it’s probably the very best possible death to experience (of course, I’m not experienced in death). Better, certainly, than a car accident or cancer. It’s also hardly unusual. It’s probably among the oldest and most common forms of punishment in the history of the world.

But what do I know?

I also think giving foreign enemies from foreign ground Constitutional Rights (which, you know, I thought might be reserved for, I don’t know, American Citizens…?) isn’t supported by our Founders either.

Advertisements