Supreme Court Issues Shocking Ruling In First Post-Scalia 2nd Amendment Case

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Mar 21, 2016.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    ..The court overturned a decision out of Massachusetts that determined that stun guns were not covered by the Second Amendment, siding instead with a woman who said she carried one as protection against an abusive former boyfriend.

    In an unsigned decision with no dissents, the country’s highest court ruled in favor of Jaime Caetano, who in 2011 was arrested for possession of a stun gun in violation of a state law banning such weapons. Caetano said she carried the stun gun for self-defense because her former partner was violent and abusive.

    In March 2015, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the stun gun was not covered by the constitutional right to bear arms. The Supreme Court, however, decided that ruling was inconsistent with a 2008 Supreme Court decision declaring an individual right to bear arms.

    http://conservativetribune.com/supr...tm_content=03/21/2016&utm_campaign=manualpost
     
  2. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,646
    Likes Received:
    223
    And when they decide the 2nd Amendment is about the rights of the state governments, and not the individual?
     
  3. Rolfe

    Rolfe
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes Received:
    391
    I did not read the article, but heard about it yesterday. As I see things, this is more than just about the Second Amendment. Were this upheld, I suspect that there would be a time that the ruling would be cited in another case...say, in one to limit freedom of the press or speech (no internet, radio, or television during the Founders' time).

    What I think is amazing is that the decision was unanimous.
     

Share This Page

Loading...