| Advertise Here » Browse ad-free by donating | |
|
|
| The Debate Forums | Blogs | | | Donate | Register (it's free) | Chatroom | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||||
 |
| | Thread Tools |
Nov 20, 2007, 11:47 pm
| #1 (permalink) (top) |
 Homo sapiens Posts: 1,945 | 2nd Amendment The Supreme Court decided not to decide whether or not to hear a challenge to the Washington, D.C. ban on private ownership of guns. They may (or may not) reconsider the non-decision early next week. No 2nd Amendment question has been heard by the Court since 1939. The Court has never stated that individuals have a 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;... --From Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli passed unanimously by the Senate 1797 |
|  |
|
Nov 21, 2007, 09:44 am
| #2 (permalink) (top) |
 adorable = power  Location: Hong Kong, China Posts: 1,821 | Really? It really should be brought before the Supreme Court so that a decisive decision on what the 2nd Amendment means can be reached. Don't forget this is all in good fun! "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist." Verbal Kint, "Usual Suspects" |
|
| |
|
Nov 21, 2007, 09:58 am
| #3 (permalink) (top) |
| Homo sapiens Posts: 1,945 | Well, it seems that the Supreme Court has decided to hear the case after all. Of course, this doesn't mean that the 2nd Amendment issue will be decided. It is possible that the Court will waffle enough in the decision to actually decide nothing. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;... --From Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli passed unanimously by the Senate 1797 |
|
| |
