Constitutional niceties in perilous times like these.Using the logic of conservatives, can we afford the luxury of a strict interpretation of the Second Amendment.
Lord help us. It's happened again:
9 Dead in Nebraska Mall ShootingThe conservatives have scolded us liberals that strict interpretation of the constitution is simply not practical in these perilous times.
OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — A man opened fire with a rifle at a busy department store Wednesday, killing eight people in an attack that made holiday shoppers run screaming through a mall and barricade themselves in dressing rooms.
The young shooter, who left a note predicting, "Now I'll be famous," wounded five others, two critically, then took his own life.
Witnesses said the gunman sprayed fired down on shoppers from a third-floor balcony of the Von Maur store using what police said was an SKS assault rifle they found at the scene.
Why does that apply to Habeas Corpus and privacy rights but not to the right to bear arms?
I've never argued that the Second Amendment should be abolished -- just that it should apply to well-regulated militias, as it states.
If conservatives are intellectually consistent, they should support me in this. They want to restriction the constitution because 3,000 people died on 9/11/01. Since then, approximately 180,000 people have died in gun violence.
It's only logical: if we are going to soften any constitutional protection in these perilous times, it should be the Second Amendment. Any non-hypocritical conservatives want to join me?