Post #14855 by onepoorguy on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (133)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 1

Not trying to speak for DOPE, but I took it as a genuine question. FWIW. IMHO, he thinks the counter-argument is so obviously ridiculous and wrong, that he can't really see it. Or, perhaps, he is religious and thinks it is god-given. Dunno.

I think I'm more of an "originalist" than Scalia, or at least more of a literalist. It says "well-regulated militia" right in the 2A. That means what it means. If one doesn't like it, change it through the amendment process. Don't just ignore it like Scalia did.

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (133)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.