The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

**44 AMP** · July 8, 2009, 10:47 PM

in the serious side, Is it an infringment? Morally, I think yes. BUT, legally? Hard to say. The SCOTUS decision in Heller ruled that outright prohibition was a violation of our rights, but some regulation was not.

Restricting citizens to one per month clearly does not deprive them of the abilty to have a handgun for personal defense (after all, once you buy the first one, your rights are exercised), but the 2nd Amendment doesn't say deprived or denied, it says infringed.

Until/unless a court says its void, it is the law, for better or worse.

July 8, 2009, 10:47 PM	#27
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,846	I usually can't afford to buy one month in the serious side, Is it an infringment? Morally, I think yes. BUT, legally? Hard to say. The SCOTUS decision in Heller ruled that outright prohibition was a violation of our rights, but some regulation was not. Restricting citizens to one per month clearly does not deprive them of the abilty to have a handgun for personal defense (after all, once you buy the first one, your rights are exercised), but the 2nd Amendment doesn't say deprived or denied, it says infringed. Until/unless a court says its void, it is the law, for better or worse. __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.