Quote:
|
Originally Posted by publius42
Since the Supreme Court has already decided that the core lawful purpose of the second amendment is self-defense and that handguns are covered by the second amendment, the first question boils down to: does the second amendment apply outside the home?
The idea of an indoor militia and Paul Revere riding along yelling for everyone to get inside where they are allowed to have guns is so ridiculous that I can't believe we're asking the Supreme Court this question, but here we are.
|
The other problem with trying to differentiate between inside the home and outside the home with regard to the exercise of the 2A is that doing so essentially asks that the 2A be interpreted as assuring two separate rights: one a right to "keep" a firearm within the home, the second a right to bear a firearm outside the home.
But the language of the 2A refers to one, single, two-pronged right: " ...
the right
to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
It's just ONE right we're talking about. Having lost both
Heller and
McDonald, the antis are now trying to bifurcate that ONE right into two distinct parts, and to claim that
Heller and
McDonald only addressed the first part.