Not a gun debate.
Simply a place where we can all collectively say:
HOORAY!!!
The court has ruled in Heller’s favor. 5-4. More information here.
Ironically, my dad just got back from a month in Eastern Europe this morning. He brought me back an original Romainan WASR(AK-47) bayonet. I wish the rifle came with it but what can I do. He and I are going shooting at the firing range to celebrate tomorrow.
YAAAAAAY! I love Democracy!
As we have been saying: When the Bill of Rights speaks about “the right of the people”, it refers to Individual Rights, not Collective Rights.
I’ve always said that if you allowed them to interpret this amendment as speaking only to a government right to arm militia, then you can interpret the First Amendment “right of the people to freely assemble” as applying only to recognized political parties and only for political purposes. Meaning that a Communist Dictatorship could rule that it allows Communist Party Gatherings, but any other gathering of three or more people is illegal and subversive; and claim that this is entirely constitutional under their interpretation of ‘Collective’ rights.
Glad to see that Scalia has discovered the Bill of Rights. While he’s reading, I hope he notices some of the other fine amendments there!
Yup, we were discussing that one in this thread.
Mods–ought we merge these threads?
Tripler
::does happy dance::
I agree with the thrust of the decision ( I haven’t read it yet). I don’t think that the ban did a whole lot to stop violence in the District. I don’t think I can go out and buy a hand gun just yet however. I am pretty sure that the District will put up a ton of roadblocks to limit what I can and can’t buy.
:joins Tripler in happy dance :
WOO HOO! Common sense prevails. (For now.)
Maybe I’ll go buy that little Beretta Neo now. 
[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
Gun Owners Rejoice!!!
[/QUOTE]
That’s not very inclusive of you.
What about us people who don’t own guns, but still think today’s decision is the only one that makes a lick of sense?
Can’t we rejoice too?
[QUOTE=Squink]
That’s not very inclusive of you.
What about us people who don’t own guns, but still think today’s decision is the only one that makes a lick of sense?
Can’t we rejoice too?
[/QUOTE]
Hey, we’re all friends here. Get naked, grab a beer and a firearm of your choice and jump in the hot tub. Oh yeah…
Guns stay out of the hot tub. And away from the beer.
Though I saw an interesting article on firing guns underwater the other day.
Man, this Awesome Bar is awesome. I didn’t bookmark that, and it pulled it right up.
I’m telling you, an enterprising person would open a gun store in D.C. as soon as possible. That person could probably retire in 2-3 years, tops.
[QUOTE=Squink]
That’s not very inclusive of you.
What about us people who don’t own guns, but still think today’s decision is the only one that makes a lick of sense?
Can’t we rejoice too?
[/QUOTE]
You don’t have to own a gun to have common sense. You may rejoice as well!
[QUOTE=Madd Maxx]
I’m telling you, an enterprising person would open a gun store in D.C. as soon as possible. That person could probably retire in 2-3 years, tops.
[/QUOTE]
Doubtful. You’d spend all your time and money on legal fees fighting the zoning battle.
[QUOTE=control-z]
You may rejoice as well!
[/QUOTE]
Excellent!
The fireworks stores open this weekend.
I shall purchase several mortar shells to blow off for freedom!
[QUOTE=Chimera]
I’ve always said that if you allowed them to interpret this amendment as speaking only to a government right to arm militia, then you can interpret the First Amendment “right of the people to freely assemble” as applying only to recognized political parties and only for political purposes.
[/QUOTE]
[hijack] Then you’ve presumably failed to read the First Amendment, which doesn’t mention political parties or “political purposes”. Which makes sense, when you think about it, since there weren’t any political parties around. [/hijack]
You may now return to your regularly scheduled gun-and-beer-and-nekkid-fest. If you throw in some hookers I’m totally there.