Fox News Sunday – Chris Wallace Interviews Justice Antonin Scalia
Excerpt on the topic of Second Amendment
WALLACE: Let’s turn to an issue that is the news right now with the massacre in Colorado. And that is gun control.
You wrote in 2008, the opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, the majority opinion that said the Second Amendment means what it says, people have a right to bear arms. Question: how far does that constitutional right go? Can a legislature ban semiautomatic weapons or can it ban magazines that carry 100 rounds without violating an individual’s constitutional right to bear arms?
SCALIA: What the opinion Heller said is that it will have to be decided in future cases. What limitations upon the right to bear arms are permissible. Some undoubtedly are, because there were some that were acknowledged at the time. For example, there was a tort called affrighting, which if you carried around a really horrible weapon just to scare people, like a head ax or something, that was I believe a misdemeanor.
So yes, there are some limitations that can be imposed. What they are will depend on what the society understood was reasonable limitation. There were certainly location limitations where —
WALLACE: But what about these technological limitations? Obviously, we’re not talking about a handgun or a musket. We’re talking about a weapon that can fire a hundred shots in a minute, SCALIA: We’ll see. I mean, obviously, the amendment does not apply to arms that cannot be hand-carried. It’s to keep and bear. So, it doesn’t apply to cannons. But I suppose there are handheld rocket launchers that can bring down airplanes that will have to be — it will have to be decided.
WALLACE: So, how do you decide if you’re a textualist?
SCALIA: Very carefully. My starting point and ending point probably will be what limitations are within the understood limitations that the society had at the time. They had some limitation on the nature of arms that could be born. So, we’ll see what those limitations are as applied to modern weapons.
Why Does DHS Need 450 million rounds of .40 cal. and .223 cal. hollow-point ammunition?
Reference: Business Insider March 2012 Article: The Department Of Homeland Security Is Buying 450 Million New Bullets
At a U.S. population of 310,000,000 DHS will posses enough ammunition to kill every man, woman and child living on U.S. soil.
Original Intent: The Second Amendment is for our defense against a tyrannical government. I agree with Justice Scalia’s statement that “limitations are within the understood limitations that the society had at the time“. In other words, citizens could only “bear arms” that were available at the time the Constitution was written.
Technology advances and so it naturally follows that citizens and soldiers enjoy advanced technologies together.
Tenth Amendment is our Safe Harbor
While federal government expands by the day, Republican governors and state legislators are rising to the challenge of preserving American natural rights and freedoms.
Yes, national elections are important, but your state elections even more so. November general elections are coming to a voting booth near you and they are coming soon.
2012 elections are perhaps the most important in all our history. Barack Obama and his Democrat lawmakers have led us to the brink of total economic collapse. They must all go, or American freedom will be forever lost.
“But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”
― John Adams