Apparently the Supreme Court in New Hampshire has serious problems with freedom. That's really unfortunate, because New Hampshire is the site of The Free State. Then again, that's why freedom-oriented people (over 400 of them) have already moved to New Hampshire -- to advance freedom, somehow.

However, the recent election of Democrats in NH has definitely slowed the advance of freedom. And now the supreme court there is doing it's part to ensure no one shall be free. They have ruled that people just don't really have that whole right to bear arms. The court seems to think that people have that right, but if government wants to take that right away, that's fine too.

The news article points out the case and makes it more complicated than it really is. However, the article does point out that the court basically ruled that the government IS free to restrict and regulate the "right" to bear arms any time it wants to. Sigh. I guess the word "rights" doesn't actually mean RIGHTS any more. If it's subject to restriction and regulation, then it was never a right to begin with. The whole point of a right is that the government CANNOT remove it. But no longer in NH (although there may be an appeal to the US Supreme Court).

If you want more gory details (with graphic, but accurate word usage), see what Bruce has to say about this horrible, horrible blow to freedom. After all, if the supreme court rules that government can, at will, restrict and regulate anything they want, what was the whole purpose of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? According to the NH Supreme Court, those documents literally mean NOTHING because the government can remove or adjust them any time they want.

Posted by: Ogre at 02:09 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.