WRAM - We dedicate our hearts,minds and bodies to protecting our great Republic!
I created this video to show you folks, the facts as found in law by my research over the years as a legal resercher.And one study the US AG's office did! You'll be shocked at what the AG's office had to say; about your right to keep and bear arms
obamas HOPE and CHANGE,,, i HOPE you understand i will CHANGE the constitution...williams...
I agree. LOL All they (the government) want(s) to do is over ride our rights. They find ways. Been going on for a long time. Ways like public health and welfare. They create confussion by what they do and hope most of us never figure it all out... Well I did some time ago... For mosts folks it's about sports, movies, and the likes for distractions...
yes,sports,movies,ect,ect,,conditioning the sheeple...williams...
We can only hope folks will learn by seeing the facts for themselves. Many are brainwashed or braindead! I've said it for over 20 yrs now. " As long as they have their distractions, they careless." Well, it's worked. If only, I had been wrong...
However the facts are showing I was right. Sad day...
First Roberts. Et tu, Scalia?
Scalia: Guns May be Regulated
By John Aloysius Farrell
Updated: July 29, 2012 | 11:41 a.m.
July 29, 2012 | 10:03 a.m.
Justice Antonin Scalia, one of the Supreme Court's most vocal and conservative justices, said on Sunday that the Second Amendment leaves room for U.S. legislatures to regulate guns, including menacing hand-held weapons.
"It will have to be decided in future cases," Scalia said on Fox News Sunday. But there were legal precedents from the days of the Founding Fathers that banned frightening weapons which a constitutional originalist like himself must recognize. There were also "locational limitations" on where weapons could be carried, the justice noted.
((RELATED: 3 Steps Obama Can Take on Gun Control)
When asked if that kind of precedent would apply to assault weapons, or 100-round ammunition magazines like those used in the recent Colorado movie theater massacre, Scalia declined to speculate. "We'll see," he said. '"It will have to be decided."
As an originalist scholar, Scalia looks to the text of the Constitution—which confirms the right to bear arms—but also the context of 18th-century history. “They had some limitations on the nature of arms that could be borne," he told host Chris Wallace.
In a wide-ranging interview, Scalia also stuck by his criticism of Chief Justice John Roberts and the majority opinion in the ruling that upheld the Affordable Care Act this summer. "You don't interpret a penalty to be a pig. It can't be a pig," said Scalia, of the court's decision to call the penalty for not obtaining health insurance a tax. "There is no way to regard this penalty as a tax."
Scalia, a septuagenarian, said he had given no thought to retiring. "My wife doesn't want me hanging around the house," he joked. But he did say he would try to time his retirement from the court so that a justice of similar conservative sentiments would take his place, presumably as the appointee of a Republican president. "Of course I would not like to be replaced by somebody who sets out immediately to undo" what he has spent decades trying to achieve, the justice said.
Again,,, The word, "Infringed" is over looked. There are arms for militia use that can be regulated for the militia. Not personal protection... Two different animals...