Comments on: Supreme Court Revisits Second Amendment

Hotly Anticipated Washington D.C. Gun Ban Case Goes Before Justices

Add a Comment See all 305 Comments
by cfin5 March 20, 2008 2:26 AM EDT
I forgot to thank Vice President Cheney for sticking up for my 2nd. Amendment rights. I appreciate that!
Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 March 20, 2008 1:14 AM EDT
With that right to arms come the right to know when.how,why it is used. Most just shot to kill. That is not the reason to own a gun just to kill in cold blood. That right is aused. The Bill of Rights were added later. We the People. Our votes don''t count now..yet I am still going to vote.
Reply to this comment
by voidmaster-2009 March 20, 2008 1:03 AM EDT
Since this case is about the meaning of certain wording, I am actually surprised that no one else (that I have observed) has brought up this point.

The U. S. Constitution addresses three different %u201Centities%u201D which it identifies as %u201Cthe Government%u201D (read%u2014Federal Government), %u201Cthe State%u201D (obviously, a government of any of the several states), and %u201Cthe people%u201D (individuals).

When taken in that context, the phrase %u201C%u2026right of the people%u2026%u201D seems to remove ANY confusion, regardless the intent of that particular amendment.
Reply to this comment
by voidmaster-2009 March 20, 2008 12:58 AM EDT
Keep in mind, we%u2019re talking about of governmental body that considers its %u201Copinions%u201D as having more weight than truth. For example, if the Supreme Court ruled that the sky was in fact red, would it no longer be blue?
Reply to this comment
by bhappy2-2 March 20, 2008 12:55 AM EDT
That remains to be seen. I can only hope!
Reply to this comment
by voidmaster-2009 March 20, 2008 12:49 AM EDT
Very true. But will they?
Reply to this comment
by bhappy2-2 March 20, 2008 12:43 AM EDT
VoidMaster- If the Justices do their job correctly we ALL win!
Reply to this comment
by voidmaster-2009 March 20, 2008 12:35 AM EDT
Hmmm. Guess I win this''un.
Reply to this comment
by voidmaster-2009 March 20, 2008 12:06 AM EDT
No true RIGHT is ever granted, at least not by any government. The Bill of Rights merely acknowledges those rights delineated therein that the government has no authority to remove from anyone.

Those individual articles are referred to as amendments because the Bill of Rights was added AFTER the rest of the constitution was written. It was added because many of the Founding Fathers, realizing that NO government could be trusted merely on its own merits, realized also that it was just a matter of time before even this one needed to be redressed forcibly.
Reply to this comment
by voidmaster-2009 March 20, 2008 12:06 AM EDT
No true RIGHT is ever granted, at least not by any government. The Bill of Rights merely acknowledges those rights delineated therein that the government has no authority to remove from anyone.

Those individual articles are referred to as amendments because the Bill of Rights was added AFTER the rest of the constitution was written. It was added because many of the Founding Fathers, realizing that NO government could be trusted merely on its own merits, realized also that it was just a matter of time before even this one needed to be redressed forcibly.
Reply to this comment
See all 305 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Author Thomas Friedman on Obama's Afghanistan plan and the war on terror. Watch Now

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: