… well regulated militia… yadda yadda yadda
Ancient language that you shoehorn into 2018 to pretend it’s the wild west.
More ignorance. Read the Heller v. DC decision. That ruling very clearly stated that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right irrespective of the collective of the Militia.
They also clarified that that right preexisted the Constitution and that the Amendment merely recognizes and preserves that right.
The right to keep and bear arms. Is that what you’re confused about?
All of which are infringements.
In violation of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
What are you going to do about it?
So is abortion. You good with that
Says YOU. I will giggle when you fall further down that slippery slope and keep whining.
Finance the NRA.
Oh yeah? Which Amendment says that?
Yeah. The Supreme Court answered your question in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Gotcha.
So a right that is specifically spelled out to not be infringed upon is fine for states to restrict, yet a right mentioned nowhere in the constitution that makes it legal to kill the unborn if they are an inconvenience can’t be restricted in any way?
Makes perfect sense.
I didn’t say any of that.
Which Amendment did they say that the right of women to have an abortion shall not be infringed? Until you answer that, the two issues cannot be directly compared.
Yes, but you absolutely inferred it.
No, that isn’t possible.
I can only imply something. You can infer it.
Okay, I inferred it from your implication. Whichever word you want to use there, you did it.
No, I didn’t.
YOU are the first one to cite case law in this thread to justify your interpretation of the constitution.
It’s not my interpretation of the Constitution, it is the interpretation of the Supreme Court.
Read it and weep.
