Under the gun, libs give ground on Second Amendment

Jewish World Review ^ | 30 March 2007 | Jonah Goldberg

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

Considering how badly things have been going for conservatives, right-wingers, Republicans and anyone else whose brain doesn't explode like one of those guys from the movie "Scanners" at the thought of another Republican president, it's worth noting that one of the greatest conservative victories of the last 40 years is quietly unfolding right in front of us. On March 9, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an epochal ruling. The court found that the Second Amendment actually protects the right to bear arms for individuals.

Now, that in and of itself is huge. For decades, the courts, the legal and academic establishments, the press and all right-thinking people everywhere have been arguing that not only is the Second Amendment a chestnut from a bygone age, but that enlightened judges should just go ahead and void the darn thing like a bad parking ticket.

[pissant]

Let's not reverse the progress by electing a man who has shown THE MOST hostility to the 2A out of any candidate, dem or GOP, running.

[umgud]

D.C. has to appeal this to the full circuit (probably in the works already), then it can go to SCOTUS. I'll be one happy camper if this goes all the way in our favor.

[Fiddlstix]

Well Said!

[Graybeard58]

Let's not reverse the progress by electing a man who has shown THE MOST hostility to the 2A out of any candidate, dem or GOP, running.

And it's such common knowledge that we don't even have to name him but for any liberal lurkers here, I'll give a clue, his initials are R.G.

[stevio]

The Second Amendment make all others relevant.

[pissant]

Its been changed to RRB. See tagline.

[DuncanWaring]

From the article:

"It's true that repealing the Second Amendment is politically impossible right now," Wittes concedes. "That doesn't bother me. It should be hard to take away a fundamental right."

It's not just hard to take away a fundamental right, it's impossible.

They can take away the freedom to exercise the right, but they can't take away the right.

Even trying to take away that freedom might not work out the way they think it will.

[RebelBanker]

Here is some real red meat from the article:

Now, you might think this is what I have in mind when I say that the Court of Appeals ruling was an epochal victory for conservatives. But it's not.

No, the real victory is that liberals are starting to accept the fact that the constitution has a meaning separate and distinct from what the most pliant liberal judge wants it to mean.

[SNIP - reference to liberal suggestion of repealing the Second Amendment]

Personally, I would oppose repeal, and I have problems with many liberal arguments against the Second Amendment. But that liberals are willing to play by the rules is an enormous, monumental victory that transcends the particulars of the gun-control debate.

[KarlInOhio]

But that liberals are willing to play by the rules is an enormous, monumental victory that transcends the particulars of the gun-control debate.

Willing to play by the rules? No. I think they just realize that it is politically inexpedient to fight for gun-control at the current time. They would rather take the Congress and the presidency in 2008 so they can load the courts rather than fight Parker v. DC right now. They know if they fight too hard against the second amendment now, they risk losing everything in 2008.

[Quix]

Any ground gained from the suicidal liberal traitor globalists will be viewed and handled as a very temporary setback by them and their puppe master handlers.

[Jack Hammer]

"...libs give gound..."

Maybe we should wait until we see how Bill 1022 - the renewal of the AWB - does before asserting this too eagerly.

[philman_36]

"It's true that repealing the Second Amendment is politically impossible right now," Wittes concedes. "That doesn't bother me. It should be hard to take away a fundamental right."
This guy doesn't even know the difference between a fundamental right and a natural right?
No law can disarm me completely. My life is worth defending.

[theBuckwheat]

When, as was the Democrat complaint against the Bush Campaign in his first run, telling the truth is just a 'tactic', then reality is just another truth to be used, excerpted, or ignored as needed to sustain the alternate-utopia of the moment.

We can review how liberals have deconstructed the Second Amendment: they have taken the words, changed the meaning of some, dropped others, and reconstructed an Amendment that doesn't grant any right that government doesn't already have. In the process, they willfully destroy a right that is a fundamental component of the Constitution.

Of course, like Senator Kennedy hiring armed guards, and nationally syndicated columnist Carl Rowan shooting an unarmed intruder swimming in his pool, the right to have and use arms for self defense is only a right to be given to people who deserve it. The little people (who, in the words of Leona Helmsley are the ones who pay taxes) have the police to protect them from each other, so they have no need of being able to protect themselves.

[Copernicus]

Mary Carpenter In Her Own Words about gun control:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K73pWPAYg0g

http://www.grnc.org/mary_carpenter_letter.htm

Mary Carpenter's letter to the North Carolina General Assembly:

All the gun laws you can imagine cannot change the heart of a killer and you know it.

Until man's heart is changed, we will be like sheep led to the slaughter without our weapons of defense.

May you stand before God and man as my two precious grandchildren's killer if you pass any more gun legislation that will make me a felon should I own a handgun or any other gun for that matter.

Best regards,