Originally Posted by alwaysshootin
If an American president/king/dictator, makes a presidential order/law, that no American can posses a firearm, of any kind, and, the supreme court says it's constitutional, is it?
I say no! That is my point. Any interpretation, of the Constitution, other than what it says, is the true radical. It is an easy read, and straight forward.
As far as the very religious, in WW2, the only reason it was meaningless, as you say, is because they were disarmed. I think it speaks volumes!
If the USSC upholds a law as constitutional, that ruling is absolutely the law of the land until it is changed via one of the constitutionally
prescribed mechanisms. That's the way it is, whether you like it or not.
Several of us in this very thread have been having a discussion about how the Constitution is NOT always straightforward. What you meant to say was that it's straightforward according to your particular worldview and bias, but that's not objective. People pull the same stunt with regard to the Bible and it's no more valid in this case.
If you seriously think Jews packing small arms would have prevented the Holocaust, you're deluded.