Well, I was talking to Pape about the use of the verb "shown" in the context of the Supreme Court interpreting the Second Amendment. I was saying that the Supreme Court's decisions are not revealed holy truth, but rather decisions on how to interpret language, which is (by virtue of being a human language) vague, imprecise, and prone to multiple readings.
If you read the last six posts or so you'd be crystal clear on that bit of discussion.
You jumping in to slay your straw man was a bit of a non sequitur.
-response to the edit-
Right, by saying that the current reading of 2A is not the only or inevitable reading, I reveal myself as the boogeyman. Boo!
I shoot guns, I was raised in a military family, and I enjoy guns. I don't want to see 2A repealed, although I do think our collective interpretation of it is particular, and not inevitable.
And if I actually believed any of that, or expressed such a belief anywhere, you might have the beginnings of a point.You flat out do not believe that I have a right to own my firearms. I oppose you and your ideas to remove these rights.
If you had the final vote to overturn 2A, you would do it.
Please feel free to show me where I have expressed those opinions. The Backroom is now searchable. Please, go ahead. Bring the noise, brutha.
Bookmarks