• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Justice Clarence Thomas today ripped some of his Supreme Court colleagues

Doc

Bottoms Up
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Justice Clarence Thomas today ripped some of his Supreme Court colleagues for not believing in the 2nd Amendment:

"For those of us who work in marbled halls, guarded constantly by a vigilant and dedicated police force, the guarantees of the 2nd Amendment might seem antiquated and superfluous."

"But the Framers made a clear choice: They reserved to all Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense...and that right to bear arms extends to public carry."

Amen, Justice Thomas. I have a right to defend myself outside my home
Posted by Former Congressman Joe Walsh on facebook.
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Yup.

I was watching the live blog this morning and was shocked that the court let the lower ruling stand.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
The anti gun crowd believes the Government will protect us from each other. And Justice Thomas is suggesting no, we are supposed to have a right protect ourselves.

I would suggest both are wrong. Armed Americans are not in need of protection BY the government. The 2nd was intended to protect American FROM their government.
 

Danang Sailor

nullius in verba
GOLD Site Supporter
The anti gun crowd believes the Government will protect us from each other. And Justice Thomas is suggesting no, we are supposed to have a right protect ourselves.

I would suggest both are wrong. Armed Americans are not in need of protection BY the government. The 2nd was intended to protect American FROM their government.
From reading the Framers' commentary it is clear they intended the 2nd to allow us to protect ourselves from two-legged wolves and a government run amok. Both, not one or the other.

As far as the anti-gun folks are concerned, they are apparently unaware of two salient facts:
1) The average LEO response time, nationally, is ten minutes. That is enough time for a Bad Guy to kill a family, steal what he wants, and be gone before the first cruiser shows up.
2) The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently ruled, most recently in Warren v District of Columbia, that the police have no duty to protect individuals unless they are in "special circumstances", which basically means people already in police custody!

It's actually a bit of fun to watch an 'anti' react when that second point comes up! First, they won't believe it, and when proof is presented (I keep that case bookmarked in my cell phone) they are generally at a loss about how to respond ... and that usually impresses those on the fence. I've never turned an anti-gunner with this fact but some fence-sitters have moved into the pro-gun arena as a result!
 
Top