By Tom Knighton
Shannon Watts gets a little unhinged when it comes to guns. We all know that. She sees an individual’s right to keep and bear arms as something that should pretty much be abolished, and anyone who disagrees with her is a target of her scorn…when they’re not being blocked on Twitter, at least.
With the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, she has yet another excuse to spew her bile all over social media. In the process, she may have made a bit of a slip-up.
Judge Kavanaugh has applied an extreme and dangerous interpretation of the Second Amendment when determining whether a law is constitutional, one that does not take into account a law’s impact on public safety. https://t.co/xCEKwUQT7m
— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) July 10, 2018
Wait, is she saying that constitutionality isn’t the most important thing when determining if a law is constitutional? The purpose of the Supreme Court isn’t to determine if a law has any impact on public safety, public annoyance, or safety dancing for that matter. Its entire purpose is to determine if a law is constitutional.
But if gun control is constitutional–which anti-gunners have repeatedly maintained–then why should the Court take …Read the Rest
Source:: Bearing Arms