Justice Stevens in a laboriously tortured dissent in McDonald v City of Chicago:
In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. ___, ___ (2008) (slip op., at 1), the Court answered the question whether a federal enclave’s “prohibition on the possession of usable handguns in the home violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution.” The question we should be answering in this case is whether the Constitution “guarantees individuals a fundamental right,” enforceable against the States, “to possess a functional, personal firearm, including a handgun, within the home.” Com plaint ¶34, App. 23. That is a different—and more diffi cult—inquiry than asking if the Fourteenth Amendment “incorporates” the Second Amendment. The so-called incorporation question was squarely and, in my view, correctly resolved in the late 19th century.
For more examples of decidedly “questionable” logic, check out the decision and turn to page 123 and be ready to have your mind blown by some of the most twisted bullshit you’ve ever read.
2010-06-29 » madlibertarianguy