Why Cops Shouldn't be Allowed to Carry Guns

[TPaine7]

75. You have been misled

..the Court reiterated in McDonald that the 2nd Amendment only protects a right to possess a firearm in the home for lawful uses such as self-defense.

Utterly and completely false. You probably read this in a "reputable" media source, but you have been misled. The Court only addressed the home because that was all that was at issue in the case. In Heller the Court only addressed federal territories too, but that did not mean that the Second Amendment only protects firearms in federal territories, as the Court later found in McDonald.

Only finding that the Second applies in the home is not the same as finding that the Second only applies in the home, the fantasizing lies of some publications notwithstanding.

It does not guarantee a right to possess any firearm, anywhere, and for any purpose.

People make a lot of this statement, but it means almost nothing. As long as there is at least one regulation on what you can do with a gun--like laws forbidding murder, for instance--this is met. As it turns out, you cannot possess guns for murder, for kidnapping, for terrorism, for fraud, for intimidation....

I don't think urban folks want to move to the right of Scalia.

Scalia didn't say what you think he did.

To assume that their are no limits is like assuming the 1st means people have a Constitutional right to publish kiddy porn.

I readily concede that the law against murder is a limit on gun possession and use. The "no limits" meme is silly in the extreme.

So, as listed in the majority opinions in the SC on gun rights, inner city folks have the right to vote for mayors that support limits that even the far right wing of the court support.

They have the right to vote for dead folks, Santa Clause, the Tooth Fair or the Ghost of Christmas Past. However, they don't have the right to take away the rights of residents. And despite the brave talk of antis in the media and your probably honest confusion, a fair reading of Heller shows that the Court understands there is a right to carry guns in public. Even the justices in CHICAGO realize this, if you listen to the verbal arguments in the Chicago case regarding carrying guns, you will see that: http://www.democraticunderground.com/117242946 .

Certain media outlets are bluffing, but the writing is on the wall. The pretense that the Court said that the Second Amendment only applies inside one's home will die an ugly death.