Search results

The provision that appears to apply in the Martin case reads as follows: A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force...

You lie, dude. As the two-year anniversary of the law approaches, the public remains chronically divided. The public is almost perfectly split: 41 percent of Americans hold a favorable view of the law this month, while 40 percent hold an unfavorable one. --Kaiser Health Tracking Poll --...

So why was the militia so poorly armed that the Bristish could just sail up the river and burn the nation's Capitol during the War of 1812.

You are confused because I don't interpret the Constitution according to my personal political views. I used to do that, but my eyes were opened and I realized that much of the Constitution is ridiculously ambiguous.

My little sister could whip Rick Perry.

Hang in there Rick. --Yellow Dog Democrat

Media Matters is doing the lord's work and I will continue to contribute to it.

I bet you didn't know that the proceedure performed on the Premier was developed by Canadian/Socialist doctors in Canadian/Socialist hospitals. One of the two doctors works at the U. S. hospital where the proceedure was performed on the Premier. Apparently Canada has somehow managed to...

Whether Massachusetts had an establishment of religion until 1833, depends on the meaning you put on the term "establishment of religion." Some say the Mass Constitution of 1780 destroyed the colonial religious establishment.

That's debatable. Dude, I favor the total and absolute exclusion of religion from civil authority and hard time for those who disrespect it.

That's debatable.

That is a reasonable interpretation, given that we're dealing with ambiguous language. The Second Amendment could mean many things.

Which founding father said that working on the amendments made him want to vomit?

Does the Second Amendment protect the right of a defendant in a criminal proceeding from having a Thompson Sub Machine Gun at the defense table?

I see. Is that the only rule of construction you follow? Do you apply that rule to all of the Constitution?

I seem to recall that during the Virginia Ratification Convention there was concern that Congress could disarm the State militias by simply not exercising it's power "to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia." There was no objection, in any State Convention, to the...

Well, let's see here. First, there is the introductory clause which seems indicate that the object is a well regulated militia.

Dude, this discussion is about the meaning of the highly ambiguous language in the Second Amendment.

Your appeal to the writtings of the founders proves that it's ambiguous. I have no problem with the meaning the Supreme Court put on the amendment. Your appeal to the writtings of the founders proves that it's ambiguous. What rules of construction did you follow to arrive at an interpretation...

Dude, the Second Amendment is abiguous nonsense that could mean many things. True. But, the interpretation is still a reasonable one given that the amendment is ambiguous drivel. That's a reasonable interpretation. But, there are others that are just as reasonable. Always keep in mind that we...