INFRINGEMENT ADDRESSED

W.G.E.N. Writes:

This is an issue I have commented on for years but with all the many states and cities announcing their intent to confiscate our guns I have to put this forth with the hope that someone will have an answer for me.

What I can't for the life of me understand is why no one is challenging this in court -  the 2nd Amendment CLEARLY STATES:

Amendment II

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.

Definition of infringe

transitive verb
1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another

"SHALL NOT" means what it says - there is no exception in the Constitution.

Each and EVERY rule or *law* passed on guns is an INFRINGEMENT on the 2nd Amendment.

With all the changing of what words mean I need to point out that 'INFRINGE' does NOT mean adding decorative FRINGE to something.

I have yet to see anyone take this case to SCOTUS to get a ruling on exactly how any laws related to the ownership or keeping of guns (arms) is allowed, much less enforced.

Has the Second Amendment been done away with or is it still in effect?
Why all the many individual cases related to guns?  Why not go to the ROOT (the 2nd Amendment) and rule on exactly WHAT it means?

Hopefully more will take this up and write about it - encouraging others to do the same.
Criminals do not care what laws are passed or enforced as they ignore the law all the time.  The only one hurt by these INFRINGEMENTS are the law abiding people.

Jackie Juntti
WGEN   idzrus@earthlink.net