Let me get a bit more legal. First, we know from Heller that Scalia believes the second Amendment is not without limits. We also know that Scalia, Thomas and their ilk on the Court are strict constructionists?that the words of the constitution mean what they say when they were penned. Given this as background, has anyone looked at what the Second Amendment means when it says, “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. The key here is the very last word, infringed. If anyone on this chat is a wordsmith, the infringed is meant to abolish, to destroy, to take away; it never was meant at the time to be inconvenienced, as we look to it now-a-days when speaking about having background checks, limiting magazine sizes, etc. Thus, even if we cede the argument to gun right advocates that the Second Amendment allows those outside the militia to have firearms, where is it that we can bear them but without some reasonable inconveniences?
Ugg Outlet http://www.youggood.com/ugg-boots-men
