ACLU on the second amendment;

#26
#26
emainvol said:
Please tell me how they will do that.
Click to expand...

Fred Lebrun, who writes for the Albany (NY) Times-Union: "For the first time since 1935, with an all-Democratic national government, we are in a position to finally institute some meaningful and sensible gun control measures that will help mightily in regaining our cities from gun terror, street by street. Gun control doesn't have to be a dirty word."

What Fred doesn't seem to understand is that there are already some 20,000 -- TWENTY THOUSAND -- gun laws on the books. The argument that more laws will make America safer is ludicrous at every level, and to suggest that somehow such laws justify undermining the Second Amendment's clear intent is to undermine the strongest pillar of our Constitution.

Obama claims: "I believe in the Second Amendment. Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I said that throughout the campaign. I haven't indicated anything different during the transition. ... We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measures that I think respect the Second Amendment and people's traditions. I think there's a lot of room before bumping against a constitutional barrier."

However, Obama's nominee for attorney general, Eric Holder (formerly Janet Reno's Deputy Attorney General), who faces Senate confirmation next week, reaffirmed in the recent DC v. Heller Supreme Court case his long-held position that the Second Amendment affirms no right of individual gun possession by private citizens.

Holder insists that the Second Amendment "does not protect firearms possession or use that is unrelated to participation in a well-regulated militia," which he interprets as a military unit. Of course, our Founders understood "militia" to be synonymous with "the people," but Holder must have skipped his law school's elective on "original intent."

Holder's remarks seem to conflict with his boss's statements about gun ownership, but Obama is not referring to the rights assured by the Second Amendment: "I'm a strong believer in the rights of hunters and sportsmen to have firearms." That's the same subterfuge his mentor John Kerry propagated back in '04.

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons. There has not been any evidence that allowing people to carry a concealed weapon is going to make anybody safer." --Barack Obama

The US Senate isn't worth a plug nickle if they confirm this guy as AG.

"It ought to be a law that people must have a gun in their homes. I know many fine police officers. But we can't depend on the police to protect us anymore. The value of human life means nothing to [criminals]. If it had been my house [this thug] came in on, he would have wound up at Coulter Funeral Home." --General Sessions Court Judge Bob Moon (Chattanooga, TN) advising a female victim of a home invasion to buy a gun.

President Obama continued campaigning for his stimulus plan, saying, "There are many numbers in this plan. But out of all these numbers, there is one that matters most to me: This recovery plan will save or create more than three million new jobs over the next few years." And at a measly $275,000 per job, that's a government bargain.
 
#27
#27
gsvol said:
However, Obama's nominee for attorney general, Eric Holder (formerly Janet Reno's Deputy Attorney General), who faces Senate confirmation next week, reaffirmed in the recent DC v. Heller Supreme Court case his long-held position that the Second Amendment affirms no right of individual gun possession by private citizens.

Holder insists that the Second Amendment "does not protect firearms possession or use that is unrelated to participation in a well-regulated militia," which he interprets as a military unit. Of course, our Founders understood "militia" to be synonymous with "the people," but Holder must have skipped his law school's elective on "original intent."
Click to expand...

While I have little respect for Obama's new AG and his opinion of the 2nd he is certainly in a position where that could have been an issue but it's now sort of like the ACLU thing. Nobody CARES what the AG thinks now that Heller has basically removed the ambiguity that haunted the 2nd for so long. The thing that made this case (Heller) so enormous is that SCOTUS had been out of the ruling-on-the-2nd business for a long time. It was precisely this ambiguity that allowed people like Holder to go around voicing his "interpretation" of the 2nd. The problem that he, the aforementioned ACLU and all others of that mindset have run squarely into is that per SCOTUS (which doesn't give a dried rat's anus about Mr. Holder's opinion) the 2nd is talking about individual rights to bear arms for lawful purposes, including self-defense. (extremely important that last part was specifically included)

It is in fact amazing to think how this might have played out if Heller had not come to pass in, basically, the 11th hour. Holder, for all his zealotry, is going to be working on a very short leash after Heller in things regarding the 2nd. It will be interesting to see if there could be some kind of carry permit attack at the fed level but since that has always been something assigned at the state level even that could be a tough nut to crack. (not to say I haven't decided to go ahead and get my permit in the very near future. should have had it by now anyway)

Gratuitous feel good story:
10/31/2008 - Cops: Cape Girardeau woman kills man who returned to rape her second time - STLtoday.com
 
Last edited:
#29
#29
hndog609 said:
While I have little respect for Obama's new AG and his opinion of the 2nd he is certainly in a position where that could have been an issue but it's now sort of like the ACLU thing. Nobody CARES what the AG thinks now that Heller has basically removed the ambiguity that haunted the 2nd for so long. The thing that made this case (Heller) so enormous is that SCOTUS had been out of the ruling-on-the-2nd business for a long time. It was precisely this ambiguity that allowed people like Holder to go around voicing his "interpretation" of the 2nd. The problem that he, the aforementioned ACLU and all others of that mindset have run squarely into is that per SCOTUS (which doesn't give a dried rat's anus about Mr. Holder's opinion) the 2nd is talking about individual rights to bear arms for lawful purposes, including self-defense. (extremely important that last part was specifically included)

It is in fact amazing to think how this might have played out if Heller had not come to pass in, basically, the 11th hour. Holder, for all his zealotry, is going to be working on a very short leash after Heller in things regarding the 2nd. It will be interesting to see if there could be some kind of carry permit attack at the fed level but since that has always been something assigned at the state level even that could be a tough nut to crack. (not to say I haven't decided to go ahead and get my permit in the very near future. should have had it by now anyway)
Click to expand...

Ever think Obama would nominate Holder to the Supreme Court???

Having been a US AG would be very good credentials.

Actually the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled in about 1840 any citizen could go armed 'as long as he wasn't trying to create mayhem.'

You don't really have to have a carry license in this state although many people buy them.

Anti-gun laws introduced in the state of NY in 2009.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top