Tomorrow the Supreme Court hears oral argument in McDonald v. City of Chicago, its second landmark Second Amendment case in two years. The issue in McDonald is whether the new right to possess guns in the home for self-defense applies to states and localities through the Fourteenth Amendment.
In an article for today's National Law Journal, I argue that even if the Supreme Court decides in favor of incorporation, and strikes down Chicago's handgun ban, the Court should reaffirm the broad power of states and local governments to enact strict gun regulations because the Second Amendment is "the most dangerous right."
The article can be found at the National Law Journal.
For more information, see Dennis Henigan's new book, Lethal Logic: Exploding the Myths that Paralyze American Gun Policy.
Since you have already identified "the most dangerous Right", can you do a follow up and identify the "least dangerous Right" and then inform the proles what protects that Right?
Your rapid response is always appreciated.
Try calling the NRA a paper tiger for the 17th time and see if that BS sticks...this time.
Face it guys, you have been reduced to an org that attacks individual businesses for deferring to state law.
That is the very definition of irrelevance being served up on a platter.
it hurts because it's true, huh?
That's pretty frightening!! (though not surprising) the Brady Bunch clearly admits there are dangers in our US Constitution. Does that also mean they feel that our other "rights" poise and have some what a of a lesser danger because they feel the 2A is the "most"
That Sounds like something derivative from the 10 Planks of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto against capitalism. What a scary group they are to this country and our FUNDEMENTAL rights.
Equally, just because Chicago bans handguns and the carrying of any type of firearm doesn't guarantee people are not carrying firearms in those locals.
Chi-town crime stats bear that out readily.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-1521.pdf
So Dennis, how do you think you did? Be frank.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1cYzATHcqA
It isn't a "new" right, Dennis. It's over 300 years old in this country. It's denial to citizens of Chicago and Wash DC was and is unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court has also ruled that even printer's ink is protected by the First Amendment, not just presses, because ink is necessary to the exercise of the right; precedent is Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue, 1983.
The issue here is whether there is a difference between a shotgun and a pistol. Wait! I forgot shotguns don't work on people!!
P
The only question left is does the 2A apply to the states as well as the federal government. That's what the McDonald case will resolve.
The first ammendment is the most dangerous. Just ast the libs about how much damage is done by Rush, Beck, Hannity, Palin, or anyone else who is saying something different than they are.
Here's Dennis "I forgot the People" debating the lawyer in the case Alan Gura:
Did you see the video of Dennis and Gura on Fox? Dennis admitted they were going to lose and are just hoping to maintain some type of gun laws.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4057573/high-court-to-hear-gun-rights-case/?playlist_id=87249#