[Masthead] Fair  
High: 75°F ~ Low: 53°F
Monday, Sep. 26, 2016

Supreme Court Gets it RIGHT 5-4

Posted Thursday, June 26, 2008, at 12:44 PM

The right to bear arms. The surprising thing is that four justices dissented. Just to make sure I didn't misunderstand their dissention, I read some of the 167 pages of the entire opinion. Their arguements were lame. Read them for yourself, and give me your opinions.

Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]


Which decision are you commenting on????????????

-- Posted by Johnny Yuma on Thu, Jun 26, 2008, at 5:49 PM

If the big quake hits Dyersburg, we could temporarily have the same situation that existed in the Big Easy after Katrina,,,,,,,,,, and I have the right to bear arms,,,,,,, which I will need for protection of my family in case of chaos,,,,,,,, Katrina style...............

-- Posted by Johnny Yuma on Fri, Jun 27, 2008, at 9:28 PM

When the founders of our country wrote, "..,the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.", it is evident that they considered the right to bear arms to be endowed by our creator just as the other rights enumerated in our constitution. The government does not give us the right to self defense and our constitution plainly states that the government cannot take it away. In fact, a literal reading strongly suggests that no laws limiting it whatsoever can be instituted.

-- Posted by interestedparty on Thu, Jul 3, 2008, at 2:20 PM

i think it is possible for reasonable people to disagree. i don't think our creator ever intended to give the impression that He would pass out guns for self defense. i think he was clear in that standpoint from his turn the other cheek philosophy. however, i realize that they didn't have the type weapons that our society now contends with at the time he left that message to his followers.certainly, the constitutions 2nd ammendment gives us the right to bear arms (i really wasn't there so i don't know how much weight they gave to the individual when compared with a militia).the times, they are achanging--when i grew up in dyersburg in the 50's and 60's we hardly ever locked our doors unless we were going to be out of town for an extended period of time, now i lock my doors every night. certainly, if some one comes into another person's house to do them physical harm, i think it is pardonable to use the force of a handgun (not a machine gun) to protect one's family and possessions. how you descide whether physical harm is intended is the question, and that answer should be on the side of the person whose privacy is being invaded.jaydwain

-- Posted by closerlook on Thu, Jul 3, 2008, at 10:40 PM

i have the right to protect myself ... i have a handgun and a permit for it. i feel if your coming in my house to hurt me, let me assure you that you wont leave (except in a body bag that is). it is a homeowners right . guns dont kill people . people kill people. criminals have guns . why shouldnt i......

-- Posted by allie on Wed, Jul 23, 2008, at 4:52 AM

Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration:

Honey Bees and Cell Phones
Kenneth Jones
Recent posts
Blog RSS feed [Feed icon]
Comments RSS feed [Feed icon]
Hot topics
Overpopulation and Electric Cars
(28 ~ 10:51 AM, Feb 14)

(52 ~ 8:33 PM, Aug 15)

A New Element Added to the Periodic Table
(12 ~ 8:50 PM, Nov 5)

The Sky is falling
(5 ~ 2:50 AM, Oct 7)

(3 ~ 8:57 PM, Aug 23)