I cannot understand how the S.C. can say permits are ok in one breath, and in the next breath claim that anything not existing at the time of the ratification of the 2nd is no-go.
On top of that, the whole idea of the 2nd is to tell the .gov that some things CANNOT be touched. Yet the S.C. is saying we have to ask the .gov permissions to exercise them? The hypocrisy is amazing!
On top of that, the whole idea of the 2nd is to tell the .gov that some things CANNOT be touched. Yet the S.C. is saying we have to ask the .gov permissions to exercise them? The hypocrisy is amazing!