From Paul W. Davis:
Wouldn't you just love to confront the "conservative justice" at a public forum and put that to him?
Is a D-10 bulldozer dangerous and unusual in the hands of an ordinary citizen, untrained in heavy equipment operations?
The answer is obvious. However, D-10 bulldozers are neither dangerous nor unusual, and very efficient, effective, and beneficial in the hands of the right person.
How does that operator get to be the "right person" if we constantly put forth that no one should have things that are "dangerous or unusual." After all, given Scalia's unusual interpretation of the Second Amendment, I would have to conclude that the following objects are "dangerous and unusual" in his hands having not demonstrated proper training and proficiency:
law books
A law degree
a pen
paper
a computer
"Dangerous and unusual" is a very loose term, that is so broad as to be construed to apply to virtually anything, if we ignore the PERSON involved, and that person's qualifications. What Scalia is saying here, is that even a TRAINED, QUALIFIED, INFANTRY MACHINE GUNNER, cannot, as a civilian handle a machine gun as a member of a non-government sponsored militia.
That kind of logic I can shovel out of the barn.
Wouldn't you just love to confront the "conservative justice" at a public forum and put that to him?