Supreme Court Justice Scalia says we’ll have to decide on “handheld rocket launchers”

This is where “original intent” proponents are not only scary, they are dangerous, and their rigid beliefs on how the constitution should be interpreted is a danger to us all.

On Sunday, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said, “handheld rocket launchers” will need to be decided. Hence, he has left open the possibility that they could be considered constitutional.

The constitution says nothing about handheld rocket launchers, therefore it is up to us as a society to decide if we think citizens should be able to lawfully own them. But in Scalia’s strict and narrow “original intent” interpretation of the constitution he would try to get into the minds of the founding fathers and determine what they would do (at that time). Well, they didn’t have handheld rocket launchers at that time and they didn’t have assault weapons (card-carrying NRA members, I don’t care what you want to call them, that’s what they are) at that time. Since the Second Amendment is so vague (and I don’t even think Scalia would argue with that) that means it is up to us to put pressure on the executive and legislative branches of government to enact sensible gun restrictions in the present. And these restrictions are subject to change as society changes. We don’t need to be stuck in the past on this issue, regardless of the “opinion” of one Supreme Court justice.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestShare on TumblrDigg thisShare on StumbleUponShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone

Government

#Antonin Scalia#assault weapon#bear arms#Founding Fathers#gun control#guns#handheld rocket launcher#justice#original intent#second amendment#Supreme Court

  • MYMY

    Well that’s because the Founding Fathers clearly had hand-held rocket launchers in mind when they framed the second amendment, no? Mr. Originalist is becoming a LAUGHINGSTOCK.

    • It is remarkable to me that a sitting Supreme Court justice can be this reckless. This is what rigid ideology does to people. And this rigid ideology (on this issue) doesn’t exist on the other side, at least not from my own perspective. I don’t have a rigid prescription for what tougher gun laws looks like, I think we need to have that conversation as a nation and then be flexible in adapting these laws as society changes. I certainly have ideas for what I think should and shouldn’t be allowed, but I’m not completely inflexible on this issue like the Right is. That’s hardly a rigid ideology coming from a liberal perspective.