individual right to weapons of war. and it s not like the nra crowd has not tried. the supreme court has repeatedly rejected even hearing cases trying to get second amendment protections for those kind of guns. in fact, it did so theo-times in the past three years. an appeals court ruled bashing large-capacity magazines is constitutional and does not violate the second amendment. that is the law. the supreme court has ruled, what i just read to you, remains the law right now. they did rule for an individual right to hand guns. justice scalia s famous 2008 opinion. even there, the court notes the second amendment does not apply to just any weapon whatsoever. and there s the keywords. it s not unlimited. that s justice scalia talking, even in the midst of his ruling for handguns.
panel? if you want to comment on the i don t know if you heard it, but justice thomas roberts said you can t tell a child someone has to be a friend, because it changes what i m most fascinated you had ginsburg talking about caulk milk, scalia talking about broccoli, so obviously they re very hungry justices. but they re eating healthy. i think we expected a bombshell from scalia. 0 for 2. that guy is really softening. i think i could go the rest of my life without hearing scalia making jokes about strom thurman. that s never a good look. that s all for now. i want to thank you to all of our guests, michael whose book after visiting friends is a new york times best-seller, and of course the rest of the panel, frank, david and irin.
i was leaning toward governor romney as an independent voter. however, my concerns when i asked him whether he would support or repeal in the marriage laws in new hampshire, he made it very clear that he would repeal it. and that was unacceptable. what did you make of bob, what did you make of him going back to the original intent of the founding fathers as his defense? i mean, that sounded like scalia talking. most people recognize the constitution has taken different meanings over the years, because times have changed. i mean, there s no reference to an air force, for example, in the constitution. there are things we really didn t have to deal with back then. one of them is mores, attitudes about sexuality and orientation that weren t prevalent at the time. were you surprised he took that sort of old conservative argument, oh, that s not the way ben franklin looked at it?
however, my concerns when i asked him whether he would support or repeal in the marriage laws in new hampshire, he made it very clear that he would repeal it. and that was unacceptable. what did you make of bob, what did you make of him going back to the original intent of the founding fathers as his defense? i mean, that sounded like scalia talking. most people recognize the constitution has taken different meanings over the years, because times have changed. i mean, there s no reference to an air force, for example, in the constitution. there are things we really didn t have to deal with back then. one of them is mores, attitudes about sexuality and orientation that weren t prevalent at the time. were you surprised he took that sort of old conservative argument, oh, that s not the way ben franklin looked at it? by the way, we have no idea how they really looked at it. what did you make of that?
him for answering the question the way i asked it. in the beginning i asked him, i said i ve got a question for you, but, please, give me a yes or a no answer without any political hype, and he did. and and it it disappointed my feelings about the man. i was leaning toward governor romney as an independent voter. however, my concerns when i asked him whether he would consider a repeal in the marriage laws in new hampshire he made it very clear that he would repeal it, and and that was unacceptable. bob, what did you make him of going back to the original intent of the founding fathers as his defense? that sounded like scalia talking. most people recognized that the constitution has taken different