Justice Breyer

Like the post title asks, which is it?  Here is his dissenting opinion on this issue:  Breyer noted, “countless gun regulations of many shapes and sizes are in place in every state and in many local communities.”   He then catalogued some of the questions that will now arise as many of those laws are tested: “Does the right to possess weapons for self-defense extend outside the home?  To the car?  To work?  What sort of guns are necessary for self-defense?  Handguns?  Rifles?  Semi-automatic weapons?  When is a gun semi-automatic?  Where are different kinds of weapons likely needed?  Does time-of-day matter?  Does the presence of a child in the house matter?  Does the presence of a convicted felon in the house matter?  Do police need special rules permitting patdowns designed to find guns?  When do registration requirements become severe to the point that they amount to an unconstiutional ban?  Who can possess guns and of what kind? Aliens?  Prior drug offenders?  Prior alcohol abusers?  How would the right interact with a state or local government’s ability to take special measures during, say, national security emergencies?…These are only a few uncertainties that quickly come to mind.”

Make up your own mind but this is the kind of activism that should not be allowed on the Supreme Court.  I am of firm opinion that these Justices should not have lifetime appointments and should be limited to a finite term.  Same goes for Congress.  I for one will be pushing for these limits because the Founding Fathers never intended for these people to have lifetime positions.

  1. #1 by Rick L. on 07/14/2010 - 9:41 am

    Sure, these old fools have a life long appointment but this old fool is approaching 72 years old and should have been put out to pasture years ago. I mean come on, just how well could his judgment be sitting in the same seat with the same influential people for 16 or so years. It can’t possibly be as accurate as it should be especially at his age with all the corruption he is surrounded with. It’s almost like these old fools are having a contest to see who can still sit at the bench without actually dying. These people need to have term limits or at least be tested every year for mental function and motor control especially if they are driving themselves to and from their office.
    As far as the issue of gun control, well if you can hit a bulls eye 7 out 10 times that’s good gun control. If you can’t, well, get a weapon that most of the shrapnel will. Criminals will always have weapons and so should the law abiding citizen. The biggest problem with citizens having weapons is that the majority of them have no common sense on keeping them safely protected from intruders and their own kids. Kids just don’t get the dangers of deadly weapons, intruders do, so family weapons need to be locked up.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: