Leaving aside the actual issue for the moment, I found this bit from the dissent rather... odd.
(From the Des Moines Register)
Given that the entire Bill of Rights is restrictions on the tools available to elected officials, is that really so hard to believe?
-Morgan.
(From the Des Moines Register)
Quote:In a dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."
Given that the entire Bill of Rights is restrictions on the tools available to elected officials, is that really so hard to believe?
-Morgan.