More Than A Dozen Shot In Chicago Overnight

Mother what a night it really was! Shanananana.

Gun control "protects" you from being able to shoot back. After all, doesn't the criminal have rights?  

You just can't fix stupid. If we could, Chicago would not exist.

Liberals seldom allow facts to interfere with their hysteria.
 Want proof? Chicago.

Gun control "protects" you from being able to shoot back. After all, doesn't the criminal have rights?

Nice. 

I like to think that I'm protecting the criminal's rights by shooting him.  If I didn't, he'd eventually end up in jail where he gets raped in the shower.  That's a clear violation of his rights.

By shooting back, I make sure that never happens.

The unanimous three-judge panel ruled today that a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year, which recognized an individual right to bear arms under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, didn't apply to states and municipalities.
 

I would keep appealing that case to higher authorities. So under this law, the united states allows people to carry guns, unless their mayor decides that they aren't allowed. That's dumb and maybe indicative of the attitude in that part of the country.

The unanimous three-judge panel ruled today that a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year, which recognized an individual right to bear arms under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, didn't apply to states and municipalities.

Did they mention any of the other rights guaranteed under the US Constitution? If states can ignore one, why not them all?

Did they mention any of the other rights guaranteed under the US Constitution? If states can ignore one, why not them all?

It's part of the madness implicit in the picky-choosy judicialist approach we have to incorporation right now.

Originally, the Bill of Rights wasn't meant to apply to the states at all because it was the states themselves that insisted on it.   It was understood that the states had no incentive to violate a Constitutional provision that they, themselves, insisted upon.

As time went on, state sovereignty got molested like a 13-year-old on MySpace and consequently, states started acting about as mature as 13-year-old MySpace users.  So it became necessary to keep them under wraps.

Incorporating parts of the Constitution to apply to states has since been an incoherent patchwork of activist judge mayhem.

Solution:  Change our attitudes.  Stop expecting the feds to protect us form our states and, instead, stand up to our states.  Force some accountability in your state government.  Then, expect your state government to do the very same thing to the feds.

But yeah... that's quintillions times easier said than done.