The words have been the same on the 2A all the way from its writing to today. I agree that the constitutional reading is the important part of this opinion, but for many like myself there was never any doubt as to what the plain English meant.
I am mystified why this wasn't cleared up long ago and to be honest it seems few rights in the bill of rights are so violated as the 2A. What I can say is, I do understand that rights do have limits but limits should be very narrow and rare.
Without trying to be funny or sarcastic, I can honestly say that sometimes I think the right needs to be treated in a way that is similar to affirmative action. The right needs to be recognized and encouraged by the state and federal governments, in places it is discriminated against it needs to be mandated and enforced that you can carry without fear of retribution, loss of job and all the other parts of the puzzle.
I know I'm an idealist but it is these ideals that's caused me to serve more than 20 years for my nation..
I see today as a huge victory and many challenges are still to be faced but finally for once at least one court has had the audacity to speak plainly and rightly without regard for politics.
Last edited by BGutzman; December 11, 2012 at 05:38 PM.