Latest gun ruling a case of conservative judicial activism
Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court took the unprecedented step of ruling that the Second Amendment guarantee of the right to bear arms was an individual right rather than a right tied to a “well-regulated militia.” Today, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, it ruled 5-4 that state and local governments are as bound by that interpretation as the federal government, a step that greatly restricts their ability to legislate in that arena.
Symbolically, the ruling is a big victory for the gun lobby. But its practical effect is another matter. A decade or two ago, when hot political battles were still being fought over gun control, rulings such as these would have had significant impact. But the truth is that the single-minded passion of gun-rights advocates long routed their opponents in the political arena, making gun-control arguments in the political arena all but moot.
In that sense, the Supreme Court is merely following the election returns, as Mr. Dooley long ago noted.
But it will be interesting to see how the issue plays out. In Heller, the court wrote repeatedly of the constitutional right to self-defense and singled out handguns as “the most preferred firearm in the nation to ‘keep’ and use for protection of one’s home and family.” Heller also noted that the right to bear arms is NOT “a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
In addition, Heller expressly did not apply to “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
As Justice Stephen Breyer notes in his dissent, the rulings in Heller and McDonald strip power from state and local governments and place it in the hands not just of the federal government, but of the federal courts. In its centralization of power, its rejection of precedent and and its investment of legislative power in the courts, the court has taken a decidedly activist role.
In fact, Breyer notes, it requires judges, not legislatures, to now address a variety of questions regarding the costs and benefits of various firearms restrictions:
“Does the right to possess weapons for self-defense extend outside the home? To the car? To work? What sort of guns are necessary for self-defense? Handguns? Rifles? Semiautomatic weapons? When is a gun semi-automatic? Where are different kinds of weapons likely needed? Does time of day matter? Does the presence of a child in the house matter? Does the presence of a convicted felon in the house matter? Do police need special rules permitting patdowns designed to find guns? When do registration requirements become severe to the point that they amount to an unconstitutional ban? Who can possess guns and of what kind? Aliens? Prior drug offenders? Prior alcohol abusers? How would the right (to self-defense) interact with a state or local government’s ability to take special measures during, say, national security emergencies?”
“Legislators,” Breyer notes, “are able to ‘amass the stuff of actual experience and cull conclusions from it.’ United States v. Gainey, 380 U. S. 63, 67 (1965). They are far better suited than judges to uncover facts and to understand their relevance. And legislators, unlike Article III judges, can be held democratically responsible for their empirically based and value-laden conclusions.”
The Supreme Court — the ostensibly conservative, anti-activist, pro-states’ rights Roberts court — has taken those decisions out of the hands of legislatures and city councils and placed them in the hands of its colleagues in the federal judiciary.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
619 comments Add your comment
getalife
June 28th, 2010
5:42 pm
“Citing Corruption, House Dems Cut Off $3.9 Billion In Reconstruction Money”HP
Obey strikes again/
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
5:43 pm
The recent history is unequivocal and damning. Activist Republican judges are threatening to destroy our nation’s judicial system. many cases in environmental, civil procedure, discrimination, and political law clearly demonstrate this.
They and their unread hypocritical enablers treat the United States Constitution as though it were a living breathing document.
The neo-cons only deem judges “activists” when they don’t rule on behalf of their paymasters in corporate America.
Paul
June 28th, 2010
5:44 pm
Rick
For when you return –
“Yes, there are many Militias in the US today (use your favorite search engine). Are they well-regulated? Some are, some aren’t. ”
Just because some group of guys with guns and a cause calls themselves a militia doesn’t make it so in the 18th century 2nd amendment case -
Inconvenient 5:27
Am I suggesting the Court decision majority opinion specifically stated they were referring to handguns in the home?
Yes.
Do you have a cite from the decision showing otherwise?
Bawney Fwank
June 28th, 2010
5:45 pm
TW
June 28th, 2010
11:57 am
For every ONE time someone claims to have used a firearm to successfully defend their person, there are SEVENTEEN accidental deaths resulting from firearms – many of which involve children finding them in the closet of the parent retard who put it there unsecured
That’s pure BS!
If you check the National Safety Council statistics you will find gun related accidents, including hunting is way down on the list of children accident causes, behind auto-accidents, skateboarding, cheerleading, bikeriding, football, and 20 some-odd activities.
Dusty
June 28th, 2010
5:49 pm
Now, PAUL, my mind and heart were as pure as new fallen snow!!! And then…….I started blogging!!
My vocabulary has increased several manholes of immensity! The School of L & D (lowdown and dirty)!! Every mother’s woe and wariness! The purity police most deadly crime!!! Alas!!!! No longer a white dove amongst us!!! A shame!!!!
Which brings us to Bosch. Maybe he eloped with the lady in orange shorts. That is something that only a desperate man might do.. Soooooo
HILLBILLY.
Maybe it was last Friday but sometime last week with the good music. Oh, he was sooo good!!! Did not know a guitar could sound that great…(Mine certainly does not sound great yet! I haven’t given up hope though..)
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
5:51 pm
Obama should hit “The Internet Kill Switch”.
He (Or any other POTUS) can now activate the control for 4 months without any Congressional authority.
Do you really like this idea?
Can you speak today?
Will The US Government allow you to speak next week?
TERMINATE THE KILL SWITCH NOW !!!
Paul
June 28th, 2010
5:53 pm
Dusty
So… you swam through the sewer and emerged smelling of lilacs. Congratulations!
We should send you to Congress.
Bosch? Elope with Orange Shorts Lady?
I don’t think even HE could ever get that drunk -
Jimmy62
June 28th, 2010
5:54 pm
It’s in the Constitution, Bookman. States cannot deny my rights under the Constitution. It’s the supreme law of the land. Why do you support breaking the law by taking away my rights, no matter where in the U.S. I live? A locality that says I cannot bear arms is restricting my Constitutional rights. Justify it how you like, but this isn’t activism, it making local governments abide by the Bill of Rights.
Also, when are you and Cynthia going to have a column condemning Obama for letting those Black Panthers intimidate voters with baseball bats in Philadelphia? Or is that ok to you because they are black?
Personally, I think it’s sickening that Obama is letting them get away with it, but his entire Justice Department has been instructed NOT to pursue cases of voter intimidation by black people. I guess Obama is a racist, unwilling to apply the law equally to all races and creeds.
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
5:56 pm
An Inconvenient Constitution,
Probably just the fall our from the past two habeus corpus-free administrations.
But as we all know, the Imperial & Unilateral Presidency doesn’t have ENOUGH power!
They NEED that line item veto…
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
5:58 pm
Paul – Please drink some warm milk.
Matt
June 28th, 2010
5:59 pm
I was using collective as a term for a group (i.e. state) right, like people who say the 2nd amendment was for the state itself and not the individual persons.
Matt
June 28th, 2010
6:00 pm
Hey, when is Cynthia Tucker’s histrionic, hand wringing column going to be published?
Blood in the streets! Mayhem!
The left is for chicks
June 28th, 2010
6:00 pm
When we babble about gun deaths-lets not assume all deaths are bad. Gang related shootings-except when an innocent bystander is hit- not such a bad thing. Dead Crip? Cool.Dead Blood? Great!
Course gang members and street trash are the stupidest people on earth-Kos and democratic underground members not withstanding- and they will shoot bystanders.
Perhaps we should offer free marksmanship training for gangbangers.
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
6:02 pm
AmVet — I disagree with your postings about almost everything.
You and I have found common ground.
This is good.
Free Speech is critical and non-negotiable?
No Kill Switch?
Dusty
June 28th, 2010
6:02 pm
Oh my goodness, TAXPAYER has now called me a lady of the evening. En garde, TAXPAYER. Prepare your drone as mine strikes at dawn!!!!
My dueling second is Josef who knows how to shoot off his mouth so you are one dead duck. (I started to use a so-called bad word there but Paul & Popeye won’t let me. Censorship!)
Truth be known, I turn into a kitchen lady around six in the evening. and now!!!! The pumpkin has arrived with six white horses! Giddiup! So long….
Paulo977
June 28th, 2010
6:03 pm
Granny G re:sauce for the goose notsauce for the gander ..Indeed,indeedThat is what it seems we are allabout..Somejust got there fastbeing born withsilverspoons tie to their u cords and hold tight to theright to do what the h***they please
The left is for chicks
June 28th, 2010
6:04 pm
Somtimes a home intruder gets shot. Rapists too. Armed robbers. The total number of deaths and injuries reflects a certain number of good shootings.
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
6:04 pm
Line Item Veto is bad.
Congress should get it right or it gets sent back for modification to get passed some other way.
This has worked for centuries. Keep it.
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:05 pm
Hillbilly and Doggone
The New England colonies went to revolt for economic reasons. The Southern colonies went to revolt for philosophical reasons. The Mid Atlantic colonies had to more or less be pulled in kicking and screaming!
How to pull the three together to form a new nation, to me, speaks to the brilliance and foresight of those individuals…
The left is for chicks
June 28th, 2010
6:07 pm
I recall an old SNL skit- show us your guns. Pretty funny. I have a Para .45 and an XD40.
Paul
June 28th, 2010
6:07 pm
Inconvenient
Me in response to your question: “Am I suggesting the Court decision majority opinion specifically stated they were referring to handguns in the home?
Yes.
Do you have a cite from the decision showing otherwise?”
Your response at 5:58: “Please drink some warm milk.”
That’s an awful lot of words to say ‘no.’
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:09 pm
DUSTY
Ma’am it will be my honor to defend your rep*tation!
Paul
June 28th, 2010
6:09 pm
Dusty
“(I started to use a so-called bad word there but Paul & Popeye won’t let me. Censorship!) ”
Just ‘decorum,’ dear lady -
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
6:10 pm
AmVet — I disagree with your postings about almost everything.
Presuming you are one of those in the Moniker of the Day camp, I have no idea what yours are. And given that fact, likely care even less. Without some shred of information to go on, I’ll take it as a compliment though.
Free Speech is not some throw away concept that the conned love to give lip service to while they try to pass idiotic Flag Desecration Amendments.
As I’ve said before, keep your filthy hands off of that sacred document neo-cons…
Paul
June 28th, 2010
6:10 pm
Hi josef nix
Saying ‘rep*tation’ when referring to Dusty sounds suspiciously like ‘reptilian.’ You don’t suppose she’s a ‘V’ do you?
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:11 pm
left for chicks…
“This is my rifle,
this is my gun.
This one’s for shooting
and this one’s for fun.”
Bob
June 28th, 2010
6:11 pm
what right is not an individual right ?
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:14 pm
PAUL
The bilingual Blue-Nosed B*tch, Moderator, does not like P-U-T-A…
But Dusty reptilian…nanh, she’s hot-blooded!
Paul
June 28th, 2010
6:16 pm
josef nix
We just had one of our fast-moving thunderstorms move in. Rain sheeting down and flood warnings. I may have to shut this down soon but don’t want to as I’m halfway thru a massive data backup -
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
6:20 pm
Paul, I hope you have a GOOD battery backup.
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:20 pm
PAUL
No rain on the horizon for us…need some though…got my back-up completed. It’s become an obsession after a recent fiasco…
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
6:22 pm
Robert Byrd, the former Klansman, has passed away. Rest his soul.
The Senate Financial Reform Bill is one vote short…. West VA will appoint someone temporarily but…….
The November 2nd election is 127 days away.
Paul
June 28th, 2010
6:22 pm
thanks, AmVet. Luckily I’m pretty well done for the day. Data backups – an external, plus another external and on disc which are in a safety deposit box.
Paul
June 28th, 2010
6:23 pm
josef nix
Unfortunately, none of us gets converted until we’ve gone through a fiasco!
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
6:24 pm
AmVet –
I was hoping for a polite response.
OK.
Kill Switch or not?
stands for decibels
June 28th, 2010
6:25 pm
The big government libs must be livid.
Huh? This ruling, from this court? that’d be like being livid at the sun rising in the East.
We knew as soon as they took the case more or less how they’d rule. Sounds as if they’ve left plenty of wiggle room to regulate gun ownership, so… eh.
Mostly, though, I feel more or less what Jay had expressed earlier–it reveals the folly of believing in Roberts’ silliness about how he’s just like an umpire, just calling balls and strikes. Our SCROTUS are overturning long standing legal precedent here, they are doing it because they are ideologically bound to do this, but… it’s not judicial activism because it just isn’t that when republicans do it so stop saying that!
A REAL MAN
June 28th, 2010
6:28 pm
These guys show up to work and PUT ON A ROBE.
The only reason that they haven’t ALREADY seized our guns is because they CAN”T.
They only have as much power as you GRANT them.
This should tell you all you need to know about this FEDERAL RACKET.
Article 3, Section 1 US Constitution—————————They claim that we can’t EVEN give them a PAY CUT!!!!!!!! ….NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!——-
Section 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Riiiiiiight.
These guys are just throwing a bone to placate the meek among us as they FORCE you sheep to buy HEALTH INSURANCE this fall. AND,,,,A WHOLE LOTTA GREEN CRAP.
REAL MEN ignore these tyrants.
popeye
June 28th, 2010
6:28 pm
Dusty….Dingleberries, and now strap-ons?
Whoo girl … What’s next in your little perverse mind?
Steve
June 28th, 2010
6:30 pm
That Pesky Second Amendment!
Jay calls reading the plain language of the Constitution activism. He knows its a dishonest argument but that has never interfered before. Why start now.
Obamunist Savant
June 28th, 2010
6:34 pm
Only criminals and cops should have guns.
Anybody who uses a firearm in the commission of a crime should get life in prison.
Mandatory because they used a gun.
Cops should be armed with machine guns and grenades.
The American people should just trust their government to protect them…. Especially in the border states.
TaxPayer
June 28th, 2010
6:36 pm
Dear Dusty,
Twas purely an observation on my part that you tend to show up here around sixish, give or take. Nothing to get your knickers knocking over.
TaxPayer
June 28th, 2010
6:38 pm
We got random internet kill switches up here. We also call them lightning strikes.
Old Retired English Professor
June 28th, 2010
6:38 pm
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
As I told generations of students, sloppy writing will get you in trouble every time. And this amendment, regsrdless of its author, is sloppily written.
It begins with a construction that grammarians call a nominative absolute—a construction that has nothing to do with the independent clause that follows it. Take this nominative absolute as an example:
Dinner being done, we went out on the porch to talk.
The nominative absolute Dinner being done has nothing to do structurally with the clause that follows. It doesn’t really explain why they went out on the porch to talk. It merely describes a condition precedent to the decision to go out on the porch and talk. Now had the writer stated, “Because we were bored after we finished dinner, we decided to go out to the porch to talk,” there you have a plain old adverbial clause that clearly specifies the reason.
The same can be said of the structure of the Second Amendment. The nominative absolute at the beginning has nothing to do with the clause that follows it. It doesn’t explain why the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Had the author(s) of that amendment written, “Because a militia is necessary for the security of the State, people who are members of it need to keep and bear arms. Therefore, that right shall not be infringed,” the meaning would be clear because there is a clear connection between the adverbial clause and the independent cause. In fact, it doesn’t even define state, a term that is used to designate a nation (e.g., the Department of State) as well as a subdivision of that nation.
Take heed, younger people, about your writing. I wish the authors of the Second Amendment had done likewise. We would have been free of a Supreme Court decision as well as hundreds of posts about the right to bear arms. I bid you all a good night.
david
June 28th, 2010
6:39 pm
http://www.tnugent.com saw Ted at HOB in Myrtle Beach Saturday. He had Machine guns on stage to keep the liberals in line! Great decision for gun rights and Cynthia Tucker must be reeling from this loss. She should pay homage to Boortz and the pro-liberty folks!
Ninja
June 28th, 2010
6:40 pm
Jay is clearly wrong here. While a well-regulated militia is the rationale for having the second amendement, it was deliberately worded so that it was not a necessary requirement for the THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms. Seriously, if the purpose is as a last resort against a tyrannical government, how stupid would it be to have that same tyrannical government pick and choose who can be armed? Not one of his brightest moments.
However, the absurd hypocrisy of the conservatives using the “fed trumps state” argument should not be overlooked.
Atlanta 1
June 28th, 2010
6:42 pm
Conservative judicial activism verses liberal judicial activism.
Whats the difference – where you stand on the issue.
No more – no less.
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:43 pm
OREP
Thanks! Seriously. You summed it up. It’s why I try to stay out of this one as much as possible.
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:45 pm
Atlanta 1
Yep.
RW-(the original)
June 28th, 2010
6:48 pm
I prefer the view from Gary Larson. There should be a right to arm bears.
Should Justice Sotomayor be brought up on perjury charges now that she’s clearly demonstrated that her confirmation hearings were a farce?
stands for decibels
June 28th, 2010
6:50 pm
As I told generations of students, sloppy writing will get you in trouble every time. And this amendment, regardless of its author, is sloppily written.
Yeah, I’ve made that point more than a few times myself. Horribly written, probably by design, because the people behind it were being weasels (didn’t want to commit to a standing army, but needed to have something in there that’d make something more or less like one possible.)
Not My Real Name
June 28th, 2010
6:51 pm
#1 – Constitutional Amendment requiring Term Limits for all members of Congress
#2 – Constitutional Amendment requiring a Balanced Federal Budget every year, no excuses.
#3 – Seal the US borders in the next 6 months. Those who are here can stay if they agree to the border closure in terms.
#4 – Repeal the 16th Amendment (Income Tax) and replace it with a Flat Tax or Fair Tax, a National Lottery and massive consumption taxes on alcohol, tobacco and marijuana.
#5 – Congress must repeal The War Powers Act. This law allows the POTUS to start wars without an official declaration by Congress. Congress granted it and they can take it back. Get it done.
#6 — 15% Across Every Board, Spending Cuts, Starting Next Congressional Term. ALL OF IT !
Start there.
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:51 pm
RW
Hey! How long before we can quote our great populist hero?
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:53 pm
RW
Wait a second. I just reread your post. Arm bears? Do you really want to Bruin to have an Uzi?
kayaker 71
June 28th, 2010
6:54 pm
Professor,
You can mind fu** it to death but it still says the same thing.
RW-(the original)
June 28th, 2010
6:54 pm
josef,
12 minutes and 45 seconds should work, but your comment went sailing right over my head. Who might our great populist hero be?
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:54 pm
REAL NAME
You won’t get an argument out of me against any of your points…
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
6:55 pm
RW
“The Supreme Court ruled, now let’s see them enforce it…”
TaxPayer
June 28th, 2010
7:00 pm
“Seal the borders” is such a strong phrase. Can’t we simply shut the border doors but allow for seepage.
Scooter
June 28th, 2010
7:01 pm
Well,I will leave all the political arguments and “blogger bashing” to the rest of you folks today.But,before I go I would like to say that I am glad I can still legally own my firearms and the ones passed down to me by my family members.
RW-(the original)
June 28th, 2010
7:12 pm
josef,
The funny thing is that if you google that quote you get exactly one hit.
Scout
June 28th, 2010
7:12 pm
josef @ 4:51
I’m sure you remember this:
“Several years ago I was invited to the Atlanta office of the FBI to view an exhibit of Holocaust photos. The exhibit began with a photo of a small Jewish store in Warsaw, Poland. Subsequent photos showed Jewish citizens with big yellow stars sewn on the front of their clothes. The photos became progressively more disturbing and the last photo showed naked bodies being removed from an oven at one of the Nazi death camps. However, in the middle of the collection was an amazing photo of a ragtag group of about fifteen Jewish men and boys taken during the 1943 “Warsaw Ghetto Uprising”. They had obviously assembled very quickly and were standing and kneeling there on the street with an odd assortment of weapons; a few shotguns, a rifle or two, some pistols and revolvers and even a captured German belt-fed machinegun. As a group of community leaders arrived at that photo, everyone became extremely vocal at the courage displayed by those men and boys. I then stated in a loud voice so all in the exhibit area could hear; “good reason for the 2nd Amendment folks.” You could have heard a pin drop.”
md
June 28th, 2010
7:14 pm
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Per National Guard as militia:
Technically, the fed military is the “people”, yet the 2nd allows for the people to bear to counter the feds. As the NG is also controlled by the “gov’t”, I would think the same applies.
Scout
June 28th, 2010
7:17 pm
TaxPayer:
Matthew 10:34 (New International Version)
“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.”
Bawney Fwank
June 28th, 2010
7:19 pm
PEOPLE ASK WHY?
Why Carry a Gun?
My old grandpa said to me ‘Son, there comes a time in every man’s life when he stops bustin’ knuckles and starts bustin’ caps and
usually it’s when he becomes too old to take an ass whoopin.’
I don’t carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.
I don’t carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.
I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry.
I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.
I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m a cowboy.
I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a cowboy.
I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.
I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.
I don’t carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.
Police protection is an oxymoron.
Free citizens must protect themselves.
Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.
Personally, I carry a gun because I’m too young to die and too old to take an ass whoopin’…..author unknown (but obviously brilliant)
**********************************************
A LITTLE GUN HISTORY
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. >From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————
China established gun control in 1935. >From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
—- ————- ————-
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
—————————–
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
——————————
You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note my fellow Americans, before it’s too late!
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.
With guns, we are ‘citizens’. Without them, we are ’subjects’.
During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!
If you value your freedom, please spread this anti gun-control message to all of your friends.
The purpose of fighting is to win.
There is no possible victory in defense.
The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either.
The final weapon is the brain.
All else is supplemental.
SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!
SWITZERLAND’S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THEY ISSUE A RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
IT’S A NO BRAINER!
DON’T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.
I’m a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!
Tea Party Platform -----
June 28th, 2010
7:20 pm
#1 – Constitutional Amendment requiring Term Limits for all members of Congress
#2 – Constitutional Amendment requiring a Balanced Federal Budget every year, no excuses.
#3 – Seal the US borders in the next 6 months. Those who are here can stay if they agree to the border closure in terms.
#4 – Repeal the 16th Amendment (Income Tax) and replace it with a Flat Tax or Fair Tax, a National Lottery and massive consumption taxes on alcohol, tobacco and marijuana.
#5 – Congress must repeal The War Powers Act. This law allows the POTUS to start wars without an official declaration by Congress. Congress granted it and they can take it back. Get it done.
#6 — 15% Across Every Board, Spending Cuts, Starting Next Congressional Term. ALL OF IT !
Start there.
We are not a bunch of wacko freaks.
We are offering common sense.
Pause…. Reconsider…… What is best for you and your kids?
Tea Party Platform -----
June 28th, 2010
7:29 pm
Neither Democrats or Republicans will give you what we are offering….
Think America…..
Eff them!
We aren’t stupid.
Pay Attention. Vote for candidates you understand.
It’s easy….
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
7:37 pm
A US Senate committee has approved a wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that some critics have suggested would give the US president the authority to shut down parts of the Internet during a cyberattack.
Senator Joe Lieberman and other bill sponsors have refuted the charges that the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act gives the president an Internet “kill switch.” Instead, the bill puts limits on the powers the president already has to cause “the closing of any facility or stations for wire communication” in a time of war, as described in the Communications Act of 1934, they said in a breakdown of the bill published on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee website.
Inconvenient, I would have to read considerably more about it to make any kind of informed reply. But on the surface it appears somewhat less pernicious than the quasi-fascist BushCo suspensions of sacred liberties such as habeus corpus, corporate assisted legalized illegal spying, big government bureaucracies, etc in his contrived War on Terror.
When the vast majority of rightists said nary a peep.
Yet, it follows in the footsteps of the atrocious Communications Act of 1934 and Federal Radio Act of 1927, which contributed heavily to the ongoing corporate sublimation of we the people’s sovereignty and which makes me very, very leery.
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
7:40 pm
Scout
my hero
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Anielevich.html
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
7:42 pm
AmVet
Habeas Corpus is still MIA…like you say (if Jay agrees…) Bush II
Tea Party Platform -----
June 28th, 2010
7:46 pm
Jim DeMint is running against Alvin Greene for Senate in South Carolina.
Just sayin’……..
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
7:48 pm
Tea Party Platform,
I disagree with several of those points, but all in all, I think there is some common ground to push ahead from. (I know, grammatically awkward.)
I favor taxing the things we don’t like – gambling, cigarettes, booze (yes, I’ll pay more for my beer and cigars), pollution, etc. and most importantly on stock and currency speculation.
And lowering taxes on the things we do, like good old fashioned work and necessities like food, clothing, housing, etc.
Tea Party Platform -----
June 28th, 2010
7:48 pm
Off Topic:
Is the oil still gushing into the gulf?
Curious Observer
June 28th, 2010
7:49 pm
Before I go to bed tonight, a few comments to Senator Byrd:
Thank you for helping to make it possible for an old hillbilly like me to go to college and even graduate school. Thank you for being such a powerful supporter of the GI Bill and for funding for higher education. You showed us that being born in poverty didn’t necessarily dictate that anyone had to stay that way. You fought for us.
Thank you for remembering the least of us. West Virginia needed roads and schools too, and it needed a way for some of us to dig our way out of deplorable conditions.
Thank you for having the courage to respect the constitution and the foresight to see the inevitable consequences of the invasion of Iraq. You showed guts when others showed expediency and popularity. And that quality is why Hillary Clinton isn’t president today.
May God judge you favorably and grant you early admission to paradise. For all your faults, for an old boy with no money or education and practically no chance in life, you done good.
The left is for chicks
June 28th, 2010
7:49 pm
Bawney-luv ur name-You are incorrect on the jap invasion thing.That is a myth. Also proly not fair to say all those people died because of gun control. Some may have survived if armed-not all of em.
That said-why would ANYONE, except weenies and chicks, favor gun control? The hardcore stuff I mean.
SNL first season, google-utube show us ur guns vid. funny stuff.
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
7:51 pm
AmVet
Which ones do you disagree with? Why? Not being snarky, I’m interested in your viewpoints here…
Tea Party Platform -----
June 28th, 2010
7:54 pm
Ahhhh — But AmVet….
“stock and currency speculation”?
This is how those who pay attention make money…
Money and wealth is good. “Collectivism” is bad.
Pay attention and make smart decisions = make money.
Welcome to America.
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
7:56 pm
left for chicks
How much have you read on the survival rate in those (few) areas where the local partisans armed the Jewish resistance?
TaxPayer
June 28th, 2010
7:59 pm
Scout – Old Testament: Thou shalt not kill.
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
8:00 pm
It’s George Bushs’ fault the hurricane just turned north toward the oil spill.
Oh goodie….
Paulo977
June 28th, 2010
8:00 pm
kayaker71 re:Brewer protecting us against these ‘illegal’ invaders with their death dealing WMD’s murdering thousands of our innocent men, women children and babies and devastating this land . So many of our citizens have had to flee to other countries and in addition they are also stealing our oil and enriching their elite!!! Hmmm they are a bad lot!!
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
June 28th, 2010
8:03 pm
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Isn’t this the same lib that whines about militias?
Know what I mean?
Anyway, some of us are not skeered of firearms, thus we have manned up and own an ass of them. Bigger ones than most scumbag criminals carry. Proceed with your unlawful intents with the full knowledge that I will create a new hole in your chest should you pry on the wrong window.
And some people have a problem with this concept?
I know the criminals do, just sayin…
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
8:03 pm
Old Testament..
Hebrew…thou shalt not MURDER…
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
8:04 pm
The G20 protesters were just a bunch of misguided youth but those dang Tea Party revolutionists are the real threat.
The internet is too dangerous.
How dare you speak sumthin’ Uncle Sam don’t like?
@@
June 28th, 2010
8:05 pm
Hillbilly:
“Kilmer is no more a bad boy than he is a choir boy”, but he was THE BEST Doc Holliday.
You woke up this morning
Got yourself a gun,
Mama always said you’d be
The Chosen One.
I’ve been taking my guns to the gym.
theyeshaveit
June 28th, 2010
8:07 pm
@@, and Gilbert Arenas brought his guns to the Washington Wizards locker room.
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
8:08 pm
jonix, I’ll reply concerning one of the proposals – term limits.
I am NOT a big fan of screwing with the US Constitution. And as much as I’d like to try to stop the entrenched enthronement of career politicians with vast amounts of dirty slush and campaign money, I’m not sure term limits are the answer.
An engaged, informed and empowered electorate seems more likely to implement change. I would mandate that the corporate owned media allow political ads and open, free debates at no charge. Not these closed-off parallel interviews as adjudicated by the American Politburo, aka the media owned Commission on Presidential Debates. After all, those airwaves belong to us – we the people. And an emasculated Uncle Sam doesn’t even collect rent for us!
I would allow for Instant Runoff Voting which allows all votes to count.
I would advocate for increased voting (not less like some of the cons want) via weekend and holiday Election Days. Currently between 40% and 80% of eligible voters stay home.
Therfore, I would implement a binding None Of The Above on all ballots. If NOTA takes a plurality or majority of votes, that election would be canceled or invalidated, along with the dismissal of the candidates, and a new election would be called.
I also advocate for the National Initiative.
Comments?
The left is for chicks
June 28th, 2010
8:09 pm
Nix- not much – ya gott figure -gun control or no- not everyone would be armed- and even some of the ones who were-would still be taken.
Anywho- how well did they do? Just saw a movie-my research-haha- about armed jews hiding in the forest, and kicking some German butt. Defiance was the title. Claims to b true story.
Always liked history- but this I never knew.
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
8:13 pm
“The law doesn’t matter anymore……
We’ll just choose what we want to do” —– Liberals
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
8:18 pm
Money and wealth is good. “Collectivism” is bad.
So are bumper sticker quotes in lieu of cogent discourse.
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
8:18 pm
Go back to sleep America.
“You will be assimilated. Do not resist. We are here to help and protect you.”
HELL NO !
HELL NO AGAIN !!!!!
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
8:19 pm
AmVet
Not screwing with the Constitution is the best argument for this one…and overall, I can see your points. My response to that, though, I admit, is an emotional reaction. However, i have seen it at work in Costa Rica and it is, in their view, at the heart of their democratic regime…wait four years, and run again…a lot of its representatives are re-elected after the wait…don Pepe was re-elected three times as President after waiting the required two terms…your other proposals do hold up to scrutiny, in my opinion…and add to the discussion of term limits…
An Inconvenient Constitution
June 28th, 2010
8:19 pm
AmVet is sad.
getalife
June 28th, 2010
8:20 pm
Enter your comments here
An Inconvenient Response
June 28th, 2010
8:20 pm
The truth doesn’t matter, I’ll just say whatever I want. — An Inconvenient Constitution
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
8:21 pm
No worries, mystery meat. Your request for polite discussion is as transparent as your inane arguments.
getalife
June 28th, 2010
8:22 pm
The con activist judges are overturning laws but the worst we have seen so far was the citizens united rw crap.
A direct assault on our democracy and nothing from the tea party.
Franken nailed them on that bs today.
@@
June 28th, 2010
8:25 pm
eyes:
I’m talkin’ these kinda guns.
We’ve got a gun somewhere, but danged if I know where it is. My BB gun is by the backdoor. Haven’t hit a dog yet, but I keep trying.
I’m assuming Gilbert Arenas is an athlete? Don’t watch sports.
AmVet
June 28th, 2010
8:26 pm
jonix, I have also considered that. And to some extent there is no stopping anyone from running until they finally win. Look at how many serial losers like Nixon and Reagan did. But it would seem that is only going to be harder, not easier, to run on the exact same platform that you lost on two or four or six years ago.
And i believe that the NOTA ballot option puts one helluva hit on the currently unstoppable lesser of two evils. Or the evil of the two lessers.
An Inconvenient Response
June 28th, 2010
8:28 pm
@@, those are the types of guns that I would not mind in the neighborhood.
josef nix
June 28th, 2010
8:31 pm
left
“Defiance” is historically very accurate. For general readers, Leon Uris’ “Mila 18″ does a good job of presenting the Warsaw Ghetto situation. We are only just now beginning to deal with the subject of resistance since the Russian archives are just now being opened and it was in the Soviet areas that the Jewish partisans were the most active. The survival rates there were considerably higher, though the statistics are not yet collated and analyzed. My own area of research deals with Hungary. There the highly limited “success” outside of the Budapest situation (which had its own characteristics) was relative to the degree of support of the local population and its own resistance. In the eastern areas of Transylvania, the Jewish resistance saved thousands and was armed. As I said, it’s just now beginning to be analyzed and that analysis has to proceed district by district…