[The Urban Sombrero]

A very stringent process for a private citizen to obtain a gun directly violates the "shall not be infringed" language of the Second Amendment. I am a firm believer in the existence of slippery slopes, and much of the logic by which liberals seek to employ to undermine our Second Amendment rights could be used later to undermine other constitutional rights. Every constitutional right should be treated as a precious possession not to be surrendered without a vigorous struggle ending in total defeat.

You hold more with Scalia in HELLER, while I hold more with Stevens. Freedom of speech has a limit ("fire" in a crowded theatre), so the whole "absolute right, no exceptions" thing, for me, doesn't fly. The scope of a right, as Justice Stevens pointed out in HELLER dissent, is a relevant consideration. "Fire" in a crowded theatre is not protected speech, as it endangers the public good. Military-style weapons of mass killing potential as the right of every citizen, in my view, broadens the scope of the 2nd Amendment too far.