Gun Rights and Presidential Politics

Townhall.com ^ | November 26, 2007 | Ken Blackwell

[padre35]

The case won’t be heard until March, with a decision expected anytime after May, this could be a big issue in Election 2008.

It could even spill down to the Senate and House levels.

If GWB can be praised for anything it is putting Roberts and Alito on the court, and his one appointment to the DC circuit was the key to all of this.

[Nathan Zachary]

"“We’re nervous,” president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Paul Helmke, told the Washington Post. “Anytime you go to the Supreme Court, you could end up with all sorts of gun laws being called into question.”

That's because they are illegal. As it is, the gun laws in DC are draconian, even Canada isn't as bad as DC. Hopefully these attempts by gun grabbers to trample second amendment rights will be put to death once and for all, but you just never know with the level of corruption we have in the judiciary, and their hidden desires to destroy the constitution in favor of UN world courts and laws.

[Emmett McCarthy]

Guiliani can talk all he wants about opposing D.C.’s gun ban because he does favor such onerous regulation and restriction that it makes it all but impossible to exercise one’s GOD-GIVEN right for any person living in NYC. Of course, among the number of things on which Rudy is dead wrong, this is just one.

[Earthdweller]

Hunter scores A+ by NRA on pro-gun rights policies...(in case Hannity didn’t tell you.)

[Beagle8U]

“Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, John McCain, and Mike Huckabee are staunch Second Amendment advocates..”

That is BS! Romney is a gun grabber and McCain is little better than a moderate RAT on the gun issues.

Fred and Huck are both solid defenders of the RTKBA.

[longtermmemmory]

I think it is telling that Thompson went to a true gun show and the others go to the posure “hunting trip”.

Even hillary did the 2nd amendment sports right trip. (or was that giuliani? they look alike, they dress alike, they even talk alike, it is hard to tell them appart...)

[MrB]

The left KNOWS that none of their agenda passes originalist Constitutional muster, and they don’t care.

The ends are all that matter.

[Still Thinking]

Though it seems to escape the mayor of D.C., Adrian Fenty, who thinks Constitutional rights can be legislated away. ?It?s the will of the people of the District of Columbia that has to be respected,? Mr. Fenty recently said at a news conference. ?We should have the right to make our own decisions.?

How do you even reason with someone like this? Collectivist a$$hole wants to take away other people's choices and justifies it by invoking people's right to make choices. Doh!

Should have been "It's the will of the people of the District of Columbia that has to be respected," Mr. Fenty recently said at a news conference. "We should have the right to make our own other people's decisions."

[MrB]

Yeah, how about when a state passes a ban on partial birth abortion?

Isn’t that the “will of the people” of that state?

Should the Supreme Court be able to strike down this decision?

/rhetorical

[Still Thinking]

Yeah, it seems to be the one thing (in addition to be willing to actually fight terrorism) that he’s done right. And when it boils down to it, it’s probably the most important thing he COULD do right.

[A Strict Constructionist]

I think the election could get really interesting if any of our liberal justices cite European laws in their opinions...an ovbious violation of their oath!

[MrB]

The election could get more interesting if the GOP adopted as part of its platform the impeachment of any federal judge that references anything but historic Constitutional texts (including their own feelings about social justice).

[Still Thinking]

Oh, no. Some rights are absolute. We’re just talking about self defense and insurance against tyrants here, so there’s no need to be too extreme in defense the RKBA. Now, a woman’s right to murder-by-vacuum her own unborn child, that we can’t mess with.

[Beagle8U]

“Yeah, how about when a state passes a ban on partial birth abortion?

Isn’t that the “will of the people” of that state?

Should the Supreme Court be able to strike down this decision?”

The RTKBA is protected and listed in the Constitution, abortion isn’t.

That should answer your question.

[Still Thinking]

In fact, the harder you have to conjure to find a given right in the Constitution, the more absolute we know that right is.

[MrB]

Of course you’re referring to the “emanations of the penumbra” argument that even leftist lawyers don’t take seriously.

[MrB]

The RTKBA is an uninfringeable right even if there weren’t a 2nd amendment. It just specifically clarifies it.

[padre35]

The Senate also could have moved more quickly to affirm GWB’s nominees during the phase after election 2006 until the Dhimmis assumed power.

I think President Bush does deserve some credit for his judges once the dopey Harriet Myers was politely rejected...

[William Terrell]

“It’s the will of the people of the District of Columbia that has to be respected,” Mr. Fenty recently said at a news conference. “We should have the right to make our own decisions.”

Well, no, you don't.

Article 2, Section 8, Clause 17
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;