After watching the Marchers this past weekend, retired Associate Justice John Paul Stevens wrote and Op-Ed for the New York Times in which he indicated that he felt that the marchers were “aiming too low.” He wants nothing less than a full repeal of the 2nd amendment.
Now, on the one hand, it is somewhat refreshing to hear the political left finally come clean and admit what its goal actually is.
On the other hand, the Progressive Lefts’ response to the idea has be nothing short of proving that we live in the post-Constitutional Era. To most of those who spoke about the idea, the limits of the 2nd Amendment are pretty much meaningless.
But even if you take that argument, where does that road lead?
It’s Constitution Thursday on a Wednesday as a sore throated Dave has medical appointments tomorrow…
In the ongoing (with no end in sight) debate over exactly what to do about mass shootings, the doctrines have become entrenched. On the Left, all guns must be eliminated, because Australia did this and ended gun violence. On the Right, Switzerland and Israel have guns everywhere and they have no such shootings.
Guns *must* be taken away; guns are a Constitutional right and *cannot* be taken away.
Who is correct? What if both sides are to a degree? What if neither side is correct at all? Read the rest of this entry