Well at least that's taken care of.

[interstice]

Another 5-4 decision: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

In short: "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."

---

In similar Amendment-validating news, I'm glad I'm not the only one making a connection between abstract-idea patents and the First:

http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/34784prs20080404.html

Comments

[suicide-sam-e.livejournal.com]

The Second Amendment is great. I do not believe people really need full-automatic assault rifles with extended magazines just because they can get their hands on them, though. Even in the Army, we didn't possess the M-16s. We were issued them on a "gun-requiring" basis. Most of the time the rifles and guns were locked up tight in the Armory.

[random-walker.livejournal.com]

They specifically allow for bans on types of weapons. I didn't read their reasoning too clearly there, but I think it's based on their interpretation of the amendment as pertaining to the right to individual defense (and the natural collective expression of that right: the militia) and what weapons are allowed for that. They mention that full-auto is a bit excessive here; this means that Federal fullauto bans will not be threatened.

I'm kind of surprised about the M16 thing. A bit unsettling of a policy to me really - I can't think of many good justifications for it; it's either a bad policy or a good policy in reaction to a bad situation. I'm guessing it's mostly to prevent "shrinkage"?

[suicide-sam-e.livejournal.com]

Well, we were only training. We weren't anticipating the base being overrun or anything drastic. (Except for New Year's 2000. We were concerned people might storm the base then and we few who were still on base got our weapons but no ammo. We were only "on call".) It was also nice to not be expected to care for the damn thing unless you were using it--the M16 has a ton of parts, some of which are tiny and easily lost and all of which require some degree of care/cleaning. It would have been just another pain in the ass.

Whoever said that the AK-47 was far superior, I think they were right.

Also, yeah, if some soldier goes psycho and already has a rifle, then all they need is some ammunition so they can start going Charles Whitman.

Still, we should have been issued bayonets. The knife has a thousand uses!

And shrinkage is a big concern. Maybe I told you while I was in Basic.. I don't remember - that the Army couldn't trust military transport for its ammunition and had had to hire civilian contractors to stop it from going "missing"? Maybe that was just a story and it was another big Haliburton Scam - I dunno. It's what I heard. And also why at the end of range days we would be wasting hundreds of rounds so they didn't have to be sent back. :-P

[hfwolfe.livejournal.com]

I'd like to patent "disagreeing with the government." Don't think or talk about it, or I'll see you in court. Or tribunal.

[random-walker.livejournal.com]

I think someone beat you to it:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/19/business/norris20.php

(OK, it's a stretch but...)

[hfwolfe.livejournal.com]

Actually, they looks like they're patenting _compliance_ with the government. Weird.