Registered: Nov 2009
07-31-12 04:26 PM
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
He didn't say he was "in favor" of limiting gun rights. He said some limits could be imposed without violating the Constitution. That's a crucial distinction.
Why he felt the need to spout off about this is a better question.
He was asked, besides there have always been limits. back when the country was formed, Scalia said you couldn't own what you couldn't carry, his example was a cannon. As an example in the present he said something along the lines of "I'm sure you could hold a missile launcher that could take down an airplane in your hands". Implying that would be a sensible limit as to what an individual can own. As for semi-autos he just said that is a debate we can have.
This really isn't news and is just another example of ft making ridiculous assumptions, in this case based on a single, out of context sentence. To echo AAA, he didn't say he was in favor of imposing additional limits, and it is impossible to come to the conclusion that he is just by watching the interview.