Cite as: 508 U. S. 223 (1993)
Scalia, J., dissenting
Wrecking Co. v. United States, 434 U. S. 275, 284-285 (1978), quoting United States v. Bass, 404 U. S. 336, 348 (1971).4
For the foregoing reasons, I respectfully dissent.
247
4 The Court contends that giving the language its ordinary meaning would frustrate the purpose of the statute, since a gun "can be converted instantaneously from currency to cannon," ante, at 240. Stretching language in order to write a more effective statute than Congress devised is not an exercise we should indulge in. But in any case, the ready ability to use a gun that is at hand as a weapon is perhaps one of the reasons the statute sanctions not only using a firearm, but carrying one. Here, however, the Government chose not to indict under that provision. See ante, at 228.
Page: Index Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25Last modified: October 4, 2007