I was just reminded that in Michigan the second amendment allows people to carry guns into...

[TreasonousBastard]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by applegrove (a host of the The DU Lounge forum).

the state capitol building.

But the first amendment somehow does not allow people to carry signs into the capitol building.

Does this make sense to anyone?

[dchill]

1. Only to gun humping right wing radicals.

[catbyte]

2. No, it doesn't. But the Capitol Commission is infested with republicans and, as we've all seen,

to them, some amendments are more equal than others.

[elleng]

3. Right, and, according to the Supreme Court,

some words and phrases are more important than others.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." 2d Amendment to the Constitution

'In 1939 the U.S. Supreme Court considered the matter in United States v. Miller. 307 U.S. 174. The Court adopted a collective rights approach in this case, determining that Congress could regulate a sawed-off shotgun that had moved in interstate commerce under the National Firearms Act of 1934 because the evidence did not suggest that the shotgun "has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated milita . . . ." The Court then explained that the Framers included the Second Amendment to ensure the effectiveness of the military.

This precedent stood for nearly 70 years when in 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court revisited the issue in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290). The plaintiff in Heller challenged the constitutionality of the Washington D.C. handgun ban, a statute that had stood for 32 years. Many considered the statute the most stringent in the nation. In a 5-4 decision, the Court, meticulously detailing the history and tradition of the Second Amendment at the time of the Constitutional Convention, proclaimed that the Second Amendment established an individual right for U.S. citizens to possess firearms and struck down the D.C. handgun ban as violative of that right. The majority carved out Miller as an exception to the general rule that Americans may possess firearms, claiming that law-abiding citizens cannot use sawed-off shotguns for any law-abiding purpose. Similarly, the Court in its dicta found regulations of similar weaponry that cannot be used for law-abiding purposes as laws that would not implicate the Second Amendment. Further, the Court suggested that the United States Constitution would not disallow regulations prohibiting criminals and the mentally ill from firearm possession.'>>>

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment

[lostnfound]

4. Maybe BLM protestors could try using guns to spell out "BLM"

It might be tough to make the curve on the B.

It makes no sense.

[eppur_se_muova]

5. They're afraid the signs might damage the paint on the walls. (Not kidding.)

Apparently, there's no significant danger of guns damaging anything.

https://www.mlive.com/politics/2013/10/bring_your_guns_leave_your_sig.html

[applegrove]

6. LOCKING

Alert: wrong forum. Belongs in GD

Statement of Purpose

Our social forum. Relax with your friends and talk about off-topic stuff. The Lounge is supposed to be a friendly, welcoming place for everyone. No cliquish behavior. No drama. No political arguments. No whining about DU.