Reply #67

In the discussion thread: Scalia: Hand-held Rocket Launchers Probably Protected Under Second Amendment [View all]

Sun Jul 29, 2012, 07:50 PM

derby378 (28,496 posts)

67. Sorry, it's been interpreted correctly the first time

If we were to shackle the First Amendment or the Fourth Amendment in the same way that a lot of people want to see the Second Amendment restrained, you'd scream bloody freakin' murder and have every right to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

81 replies	Author	Time	Post
Scalia: Hand-held Rocket Launchers Probably Protected Under Second Amendment [View all]	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	OP
Nice restriction, Scalia, you Liberty Hater	alcibiades_mystery	Jul 2012	#1
Mmm, vehicle-held rocket-launcher bagged pheasant.	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	#5
Shoulder fired stinger missiles are essential to the success of our small business.	Zorra	Jul 2012	#7
personal nukes	C_U_L8R	Jul 2012	#2
Commenter at Think Progress: if suitcase nukes are outlawed...	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	#3
i just wanted to add this picture	d_r	Jul 2012	#37
Hand grenades can be carried easily	gollygee	Jul 2012	#4
"We'll see!" n/t	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	#6
He might be	warrior1	Jul 2012	#8
This post was hidden by jury decision.	lark	Jul 2012	#40
You can already legally own a grenade launcher	justanidea	Jul 2012	#9
Well then, that's a-okay!!	Patiod	Jul 2012	#10
Just pointing out that such weapons are already legal to own.	Kaleva	Jul 2012	#35
Has a Form 4 application ever been approved for a Stinger? I mean, aside from al-Qaeda to own them.	leveymg	Jul 2012	#54
Depends on how the ATF classifies the Stinger	Kaleva	Jul 2012	#58
What prey exactly might one hunt with such hand-held devices? F-16 Falcons? Airbuses?	leveymg	Jul 2012	#61
True	Reasonable_Argument	Jul 2012	#47
:: groan:::	Coexist	Jul 2012	#11
Scalia also said that legislatures can regulate handheld guns. nt	hack89	Jul 2012	#20
IED's are covered, then?	elehhhhna	Jul 2012	#12
If it fits in your Creator-made hand, it's your Creator-given right to own one. n/t	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	#15
does this also mean bans on fireworks are unconstitutional?	elehhhhna	Jul 2012	#16
Well, of course!	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	#18
As long as you have the proper paperwork, you can own one.	Kaleva	Jul 2012	#38
Certainly they are regulated by zoning rules?	Baitball Blogger	Jul 2012	#13
Local ordinances can apply to firearms too.	Kaleva	Jul 2012	#39
what an ego tony has, just can't stay off the teevee	spanone	Jul 2012	#14
Wannabe "Jokers" are getting excited.	DCBob	Jul 2012	#17
Instead of banning rocket launchers - they'll ban copies of "The Dark Knight" instead .	Initech	Jul 2012	#42
Scalia: Guns May be Regulated	hack89	Jul 2012	#19
And yet, I bet he's not a fan of this song.	tanyev	Jul 2012	#21
No one is a fan of that song.	appal_jack	Jul 2012	#25
I'm a fan	blues lover	Jul 2012	#36
Me too!	derby378	Jul 2012	#75
It's been legal for decades to own a hand held rocket or grenade launcher	Kaleva	Jul 2012	#22
"Amen, brother. I don't go anywhere without my mutated anthrax ... for duck hunting."	toddwv	Jul 2012	#23
National Raygun Association I saw the Professor there...........	kooljerk666	Jul 2012	#34
What's so difficult to understand about "we'll see" and "that will have to be decided"?	-..__...	Jul 2012	#24
Invented hysteria, outrage and fear-mongering....	PavePusher	Jul 2012	#28
What about nuclear weapons?	no_hypocrisy	Jul 2012	#26
Depends on the yield.	-..__...	Jul 2012	#29
It would have to come with	sarisataka	Jul 2012	#45
Ahhh, the "couldn't imagine it, so it doesn't apply" school of Constitutional Denialism.	PavePusher	Jul 2012	#27
See post upthread re: "common sense"	The Blue Flower	Jul 2012	#31
The point is	sarisataka	Jul 2012	#46
We have had this argument	quaker bill	Jul 2012	#76
So you are maintaining that	sarisataka	Jul 2012	#77
Article 5. Have at it. n/t	PavePusher	Jul 2012	#79
Does that mean?	kentuck	Jul 2012	#30
You never did have to hide it.	Kaleva	Jul 2012	#33
No serious originalist (and certainly not Scalia) has the view you ascribe to Scalia.	Vattel	Jul 2012	#32
Neither does anyone else who treasures our Constitutional rights	derby378	Jul 2012	#51
Allow me to introduce you to Scalia's reasoning on the 14th Amendment	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	#52
Scalia doesn understand that Bear means "bring to bear"	slampoet	Jul 2012	#41
Aha, you either commune with the dead or claim great age.	Marengo	Jul 2012	#43
The headline is false.	former9thward	Jul 2012	#44
OH, you really must find another hobby	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	#53
Yet again you can't repond with facts.	former9thward	Jul 2012	#59
Lighten up, Francis.	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	#60
I want a hand-held rocket launcher for Christmas. I want it in pink	Rosa Luxemburg	Jul 2012	#48
Me, too! But make mine forest green	derby378	Jul 2012	#49
Woohoo I can get something like this	nadinbrzezinski	Jul 2012	#50
Of course they meant rocket launchers. Rockets are in the Star Spangled Banner!	Bolo Boffin	Jul 2012	#55
Political Cartoon:	RedStateLiberal	Jul 2012	#56
Actually, he's wrong about the 2nd amendment: it allows qualified citizens to	apocalypsehow	Jul 2012	#57
Now that you've set the Wayback Machine for 1994...	derby378	Jul 2012	#62
Like Dred Scott or Plessey v. Ferguson, that ruling is not destined to last.	apocalypsehow	Jul 2012	#63
Even a busted clock is right twice a day	derby378	Jul 2012	#64
Your right to join a National Guard, if you qualify, is indeed here to stay.	apocalypsehow	Jul 2012	#65
Sorry, it's been interpreted correctly the first time	derby378	Jul 2012	#67
Nope, and once a progressive majority gets on the court it will be reinterpreted	apocalypsehow	Jul 2012	#69
No, it isn't...	derby378	Jul 2012	#70
Baloney, to your entire reply. But you go right on thinking whatever you wish.	apocalypsehow	Jul 2012	#71
Perhaps I should eat something in the meantime?	derby378	Jul 2012	#72
It must have been rough in post revolutionary America	sarisataka	Jul 2012	#74
Celebrate the independence of our country by blowing up a small part of it.	Initech	Jul 2012	#66
This is a silly distraction. Because there is no law explicitly prohibiting citizens from owning...	slackmaster	Jul 2012	#68
Maybe.	moondust	Jul 2012	#73
Wait.. thats descrimination!	quakerboy	Jul 2012	#78
But he's for strict adherence to the original constitution of 1787	DFW	Jul 2012	#80
This mother fucker is BAT SHIT CRAZY!!!!	bigdarryl	Jul 2012	#81

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.