Here we go again…

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    311 months ago

    It’s still not necessary to qualify it that way. “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” stands on its own with the preceding sentence explaining Why.

    Regardless of semantics, the Supreme Court has confirmed individual rights to bear arms in triplicate and that matter is settled.

    • @tastysnacks
      link
      211 months ago

      Nothing is settled with this supreme court.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          211 months ago

          We really need to get them to review Harlow V Fitzgerald, and present them with the full text of section 1983 with the 16 missing words, as the 1871 Congress passed that law.

          • Dick Justice
            link
            fedilink
            211 months ago

            Wtf. I just googled that. How has that been allowed to continue foe a hund and fifty fucking years?? Jesus H. Christ.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              111 months ago

              Well the case I referenced occurred in 1982, but I think it was mainly because no one took the time to look at the Congressional Record, and compare it to the text in the Federal Register.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            111 months ago

            I don’t know much about that, but if that would get rid of qualified immunity for police then I concur.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              211 months ago

              That’s the case that caused QI in 1982. The 16 missing words explicitly outlaw any sort of immunity for any government officials.