Posted on 11/26/2007 7:40:29 AM PST by gpapa
Hillary calls them, “kitchen table issues,” the political questions Americans take seriously enough to talk about them privately, in their homes, among family and friends. Whether she likes it or not, one of those issues is gun control. Last week the Supreme Court decided to take on the biggest gun control case in almost seventy years: District of Columbia v. Heller. The Heller case is an appeal by the DC government from the US Circuit Court’s decision holding unconstitutional D.C.’s ban on privately-owned handguns and severe limits on other weapons.
The Heller appeal will be argued next spring and unless something very odd happens, it will be decided before the election. This is very bad news for the Democrats who -- like Hillary -- don’t believe that the Second Amendment grants to private citizens the right to keep and bear arms.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
Actually, it was the dems back in the Bush Gore contest that pushed this phrase. Gore was chanting " lock-box lock-box lock-box lock-box lock-box lock-box lock-box."
I went through a lot of Tums back then.
If the SC goes collective, it will be time to fix the problem with another Constitutional Amendment. The debate will be full throated, even if Hillary Matters doesn't participate. In any event, what’s a Democrat to do.
Same with illegal immigration AMNESTY voters, Democrats are screwed. Hillary Matters seems to want to convince people she doesn't talk straight, maybe calling her campaign "the double talk express" would be to her liking?
The list keeps growing and Iraq is not going to be at the top of the list.
That is what the Bill of Rights was designed for, to limit government from abusing it's citizens, and restore governement to the people if necessary.
Provided, of course, the always whining wing of the Conservative Media Establishment finally give up their habit of relentlessly fragging their own side over trifles and finally focus on the REAL enemy in 2008.
It will be up to the Conservative Alternative Media to carry this message. The Clintonized "Main stream" media is certain not going to be pestering Mrs Bill Clinton with any of these nasty wedge issues.
What would the ammendment say, “...and we mean it this time?”
Yep. Those burning issues... Diamonds or pearls?
Grants? No. Protects. Duh...
Idiot reporters...
We might not win control of the legislature, but it very much looks like we're going to win on the issues.
Add a “Bill of Rights Enforcement” clause stating that any legislator or judicial activist attempting to subvert this will be charged with a felony on the same level as Treason.
If the government refuses to follow the law, I don’t think another law will make a difference.
If the government refuses to follow the Law, then the government isn’t the government any more. Hunt them down and remove them... Use whatever force is necessary.
Guns are not a kitchen table issue.
More a work table. Having to move everything before dinner is a real pain.
Full text will read:
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
The Second Amendment does not grant the right to keep and bear arms. A "right" is and cannot be granted, withheld, or revoked. Privileges are granted (and withheld or revoked). There is a vast gulf between a right and a privilege.
The Second Amendment recognizes and codifies the right of private citizens to keep and bear arms.
Of course, we can't expect "journalists" to understand, much less report, the difference between a right and a privilege. That would lead to understanding the Constitution means precisely what it says.
I think that it already does.
“Of course, we can’t expect “journalists” to understand, much less report, the difference between a right and a privilege.”
Owning as firearm is about the only “right” that the left does not recognize.
The Right to kill unborn babies.
The Right to marry an individual of the same sex.
The Right to pay lots of taxes.
The Right to a free ride.
on and on and on, ad nausem.
You are right, the Democrats are going to get blasted anyway.
Democrats everywhere will have to put down their marker — Come out come out wherever you are Hillary Matters, and drag the rest of those Democrats with you. The less pain for the Democrats comes in losing at the SC on individual rights points, but still hanging on with reasonable regulation — what I think the SC will ultimately do, it is after all the Bill of Rights. Tough to rewrite history when you will be held to account.
But the election debate is going to be fun. Who knew the 2008 election would be about this and AMNESTY, when it look like it was going to be all about Iraq. Who knows what else is going to get added to the list ...
you have to understand the judges.
The test would be one of “strict scrutiny” so you could actually HAVE a fundamental individual right AND the ban on handguns. The court could find it is the TYPE of gun banned and since you could own a highly regulated long gun, the strict scrutiny test could be passed.
The letter of the law is irrelevant here. It is the minds of the judges that matter.
It is going to be 1992 “its the ecconomy redux” you can see it as they downplay the good black friday and internet monday numbers and go all jimmy carter on the $100 per barrel oil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.