decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
My reply | 355 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
My reply
Authored by: PJ on Friday, April 05 2013 @ 09:07 PM EDT
Nobody is trying to totally eliminate it. Someone
has lied to you.

And don't forget something. There is more than
one Constitutional amendment. Sometimes you
have to balance them. For example, people have
a right to life and the pursuit of happiness that
is God given, and we have a right to assemble
peacefully. If some nut walks into the movietheater
and instead of yelling Fire! starts shooting us,
our fundamental rights have been violated. Some of
us would like gun rights folks to think about their
responsibility for those deaths, if they fight for
no restrictions on who can get a gun and what kind
of gun they can get.

No one has a right to enable crime, and that is
what is happening currently. Gun rights folks say
there's no point in passing such laws because
criminals won't keep the law anyway, but if you
sell a gun to a criminal, you are responsible.
There is no escape, not before man or God. And
that's why the Supreme Court said states do have
a right to restrict the right to bear arms.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • My reply - Authored by: artp on Friday, April 05 2013 @ 11:25 PM EDT
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )