The Supreme Court in a unanimous 9-0 vote strengthened the law that states if someone is found guilty of domestic violence, even if no actual violence was proved, they can’t own a gun.
What part of ‘shall not be infringed’ regarding the 2nd Amendment do these ‘justices’ not understand?
To take someone’s gun because they have been involved in domestic violence will NOT stop domestic violence from occurring in the future.
These 2 issues are not related in any way.
See Page 2 For Complete Story:
this is just another infringement on our 2nd ammendment rights..bull$#%&!@*…shall not be infringed ..is that hard to comprehend…
WELLL THEY CAVE TO THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION AND WE ALL KNOW IT IS NOT GOING TO STOP DOMESTIC VIOLENCE .IT IS ABOUT GUN CONTROL NO MATTER HOW YOU CHEW IT AND SPIT IT OUT ..
I am an advocate of the 2nd Amendment and very vocally so and I do agree with this decision. There are people within our society, like it or not that do not deserve the right to own a fire arm and you and I both know this. Just think about it. There are fine lines on both sides of this issue. Anyone with propensity to do deadly harm to another without just cause has no right to be in possession of a firearm. I don’t agree with gun registration laws but as long as we have to deal with them utilize the for the best possible end result.
what is happing to the hightest court in the land, what are they doing we need term limits on them
Glenn Wychryst ….
Well Regulated. ..Due Process.. quote the rest
Charlie Brown… here here… exactly
not right, innocent until proven guilty!
Good. They shouldn’t own weapons if they are violent in nature
yes we need term limit’s
Don’t they know the people who fought for freedom, most of them were criminals