The wife was reading RNS at work, probably looking for clue as to what her Christmas presents might be, and found the post about the gun bigots in DC trying to proclaim the 2nd Amendment as unneccessary in the 21st Century.
I’m cleaning my rifles after Sunday’s range session and she brings it up. We talk about it for a bit, I let her know that popular opinion is that the SCOTUS wouldn’t touch it with a ten-foot pole and she asks me what if they do.
I tell her about a couple of the extreme hypotheticals: The Positive Turn (e.g. – Every piece of anti-gun legislation going back 70+ years in null and void) , or The Negative Turn (e.g. – They rule the 2nd refers to the Nat’l Guard and the fed/states begin their confiscations).
Then, my wife, the poli-sci major, talking about the second hypothetical, says “and nothing can overrule the SCOTUS, right?”
I leave aside Congress’ power to legislate an Amendment to the Constitution and point my thumb towards The Hun Bastard and say “Oh, there are somethings that can.”
She replied with an “Oh.”
I’ve told her about the Four Boxes before (i.e. – soap, ballot, jury and ammo) and she doesn’t like the last one. Espcially since we were talking about the third one.
And on a somewhat more lighthearted note, Uncle has joined into a very good discussion of the 2nd Amendment here. It is rather entertaining to watch him correct folks with zeal.
There will be a debate first: do we simply shoot these usurpers of the Constitution, or try them for their crimes and hang them?
They have to be tried for their crimes first. Simple one day affairs are all that’s needed. The rule of law MUST be maintained, even in times of turmoil.
However I don’t think we should shoot them. Hanging is better. It’s enviromentally friendly. You can re-use the rope.