1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

SCOTUS: People have the right to own guns

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by EStreetJoe, Jun 26, 2008.

  1. bydesign77

    bydesign77 Active Member

    Not only do I believe the Second Amendment protect the individual's right to gun ownership, I like the fact that in Georgia, starting July 1, you can carry concealed weapons almost anywhere.

    And I am not shocked at all there are people on here, and elsewhere, that believe this ruling is wrong. It's sad.
     
  2. No drive-bys allowed. Please explain.
     
  3. Ashy Larry

    Ashy Larry Active Member

    Start charging $1000 a bullet.
     
  4. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    Of course, subjecting those "unelected judges" to elections would also be overturning the Constitution, and a much clearer portion, at that.
     
  5. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    I'm not suggesting that.
     
  6. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]

    Guns don't kill people, I kill people!
     
  7. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    No activist judges would have upheld this ridiculous ban and thus overturned the constitution.......
     
  8. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    Then, perhaps, "Judges appointed in the manner explicitly provided for in the Constitution of the United States" would be a more accurate phrase.
     
  9. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Sarcasm — Stating the opposite of an intended meaning especially in order to sneeringly, slyly, jest or mock a person, situation or thing.
     
  10. sportschick

    sportschick Active Member

    Man, you even used the font, Inky.
     
  11. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Then what are you suggesting? You decry the fact that "unelected" judges, legally in place by virtue of the Constitution, are in fact trying to interpret the Constitution. How dare they!

    And yet you don't approve of making them elected officials in direct defiance of the Constitution.

    So how, exactly, would YOU fix this?
     
  12. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    It's a shame that grasping the difference between upholding what is clearly written in The Constitution and making up "rights" out of whole cloth is so difficult for you.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page