View Single Post
Old September 13, 2012, 11:07 AM   #43
Senior Member
Join Date: October 29, 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 453
One could argue that firearms designed for sporting purposes and sporting uses of those firearms may not be protected by the 2nd Amendment. These arms and their uses may be more regulatable by federal and state governments than are arms designed, kept and/or carried for anti-tyranny (or, as recognized in Heller, for self-defense) purposes. There may be other bases for protecting rights related to sports, including hunting, but that is not the objective of the 2nd Amendment.

This distinguishes us from most other countries in the world. It may be difficult for foreigners to understand -- heck, some SCOTUS justices don't understand it -- but thankfully we have the Bill of Rights that is not (supposed to be) subject to the whim or emotion of the population, even if they comprise a majority.
Send lawyers, guns, and money...
Armorer-at-Law is offline  
Page generated in 0.03000 seconds with 7 queries