[lbo-talk] Collective idiocy....

[Wojtek S]

And one more thing - while the 2nd amendment permits gun ownership -
there is nothing in it that permits carrying them whenever one pleases
- which is the way that the "literalist" SCOTUS seems to be
interpreting it.  I can own a car, but it does not mean that I can
take it anywhere I want.  In fact, the number of places I can take a
car is rather limited, but it does not seem to infringe in any way on
my right right to own one.  In fact, I can have the right to own the
car but be denied the privilege to drive it, in which case I am not
able to take what I legally own to any place but my garage.

Why does not the same apply to guns?  I can own a gun, as the 2nd
amendment says, but that is separate from keeping it in any particular
place.  I see no contradiction between the 2nd amendment and a
regulation that permits carrying fire arms only in designated spaces
where it is safe to so, such as shooting ranges or gun clubs.  I can
store a gun on a privately owned shooting range or gun club where
access to it is controlled and supervised, and I still own it in that
no one else can have or use without my permission while I can do
whatever I want with it as long as I do not take out of these premises
- just as I cannot drive a car that I own in places where vehicular
traffic is prohibited.

To me, this is a literal interpretation of the 2nd amendment, Scalia's
legalistic drivel notwithstanding.

-- 
Wojtek

"An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."