I’m loving the footnotes. Things like:
And JUSTICE STEVENS is dead wrong to think that the right to petition is “primarily collective in nature.”
I’m kind of expecting to see one that says:
Die in a fire.
...Worse still, the phrase “keep and bear Arms” would be incoherent. The word “Arms” would have two different meanings at once: “weapons” (as the object of “keep”) and (as the object of “bear”) one-half of an idiom. It would be rather like saying “He filled and kicked the bucket” to mean “He filled the bucket and died.” Grotesque.
I actually LOL’ed.
In a comment to this post at the AJC blog:
Whoever believes gun bans work also believes all of the stories in Penthouse Forum are true.
Translated from politician-speak: "I didn't really mean what I said before!"
From the opinion:
It is enough to note, as we have observed, that the American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon. There are many reasons that a citizen may prefer a handgun for home defense: It is easier to store in a location that is readily accessible in an emergency; It cannot easily be redirected or wrestled away by an attacker; it is easier to use for those without the upperbody strength to lift and aim a long gun; it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police. Whatever the reason, handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home, and a complete prohibition of their use is invalid.
From this lady:
To celebrate I made an Apple Pie. (recipe will appear in comments).
Lord, but it's great to be a woman in this country.
(And that pie looks good)
Lots of commentary around, lots of major media weenies trying to downplay it and spin it their way. In a way, the real downside of this to me is that four Justices of SCOTUS were willing to trash another part of the Constitution.
Another upside? Lots of people like Bloomberg and Dailey are having heartburn right now.