Maybe, on another thread, we could discuss whether Hitler's Nazi Party really was elected legally, but not here. What I really meant in my earlier post was modern Germany.

Here, in Britain, and I imagine for all other Parliamentary systems based on the British model, we vote for individual MP's, not for a particular party. That's not to say that people aren't elected because they belong to a particular party. Is that so differeent from your system? Generally, in Britain at least, but I'm sure also in many of the other Parliaments a single party has a sufficient majority to rule without the support of other parties. The present British Government has a clear majority and needs no support from anyone. However, coalitions do occur also.

As for the guns ... I agree with you that the Supreme Court merely declared what the law is. A law that was made some 200 years ago (give or take) is still in force, and the Supreme Court has now said what it actually means. I said as much earlier.

I also said it can now be seen to be a bad law. I dare say it was a good and useful law when it was first enacted, but not now. Now, no-one can give a convincing reason why it is a good law. I think the Supreme Court got it wrong by failing to interpret the law much more restrictively. That's my opinion, and I believe it to be a sound one...