Justice should wake up to reality

Scripps Howard News Service ^ | 01/03/2008 | Dan K. Thomasson

[Marauder]

WASHINGTON -- If the Supreme Court is as hermetically sealed from outside influence as many believe, then the recent carnage in Nebraska and Colorado will have no influence on its decision whether the Second Amendment gives individual Americans the right to bear whatever arms they choose or limits it to a collective right controlled by the state for the national defense.

But if the justices do not operate in a vacuum, then the two disturbed individuals who shot up an Omaha shopping mall and two Colorado religious centers with AK47 assault rifles never meant for civilian ownership will weigh heavily on their minds when they consider whether a lower court was correct in overturning the District of Columbia's super-strict gun law. Congress, in the wake of these and the Virginia Tech tragedies, has just passed a law making it more difficult for those designated with mental problems to buy a firearm.

The justices also might note the "good citizen" in Texas who allegedly took the law into his own hands and, despite repeated warnings from a police dispatcher, went outside and blew away two men burglarizing a neighbor's home almost in front of a plainclothes officer who had just arrived. The latter incident has caused a storm of protest from outraged citizens, who contend it was more racially motivated than a matter of protecting property. The suspect's defense, at least on transcripts, was that Texas had passed a law saying that if his own property were threatened, he didn't have to confine his protective actions to the inside.

Undoubtedly, those defending the unimpeded ownership of everything from automatic weapons to bazookas will cite the fact that the Colorado murderer was stopped by an armed female whose action probably saved dozens of lives. Right. But understand that she was carrying her weapon as a volunteer security person at the Colorado Springs mega-church where the incident took place. Also, she had been a trained police officer in Minneapolis before moving to Colorado. She wasn't just some citizen who happened to be packing heat.

The court has not ruled on the validity of the Second Amendment since the late 1930s, and then not definitively -- although it seemed to lean toward the collective argument. The nation's highest judiciary takes a long time to come to grips with some thorny issues. The court somehow managed to deal with school segregation, but it took nearly a century after the Civil War, and it finally legalized abortion, but not before any number of desperate women had lost their lives trying to hold sway over their own bodies.

A betting man would have to put his money on the gun issue being decided on a 5-4 vote, with the odds favoring upholding the individual-rights position on which the lower court based its decision. There is, of course, a chance that the 5-4 goes the other way if a thoughtful justice like Anthony Kennedy swings toward the view that gun control is imperative to a civilized society. The gambler would note that the voices of 18th-century reasoning that belong traditionally to Antonin Scalia and his hip-pocket disciple, Clarence Thomas, would resound loudly for everyone being allowed to go around armed. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito could be expected to join them.

Of course, this is simply speculation based solely on past voting patterns. Whatever the decision, it isn't expected to be forthcoming for some months, probably as late in the court's term as June. But it seems important that going into the New Year that it is the most fervent hope that the nine justices somehow realize that the survival of this urban brand of democracy -- as opposed to the rural kind that prevailed when the Constitution was written -- depends on bringing some rational control over the culture of violence that is abetted by our fascination with firearms.

If that is to be accomplished, the court has to be aware of the lives that already have been lost in our schools, shopping centers, churches and elsewhere because of this utter insanity. If the justices insist, however, that the amendment is so ambiguous as to leave the matter in doubt, they will have done this nation a great harm as well as established their imperviousness to conditions around them, validating the arguments of those who believe they are hermetically sealed from reality.

(Dan K. Thomasson is former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service.)

[Marauder]

"You can't fix stupid" - Ron White

[Flintlock]

I’m very worried about a clueless SCOTUS that rules by whim rather than the Constitution—and has for more than a generation, now.

[Badeye]

(chuckle)

[Mr. Jazzy]

“Beauty is temporary but dumb is forever” - Judge Judy

[2banana]

Undoubtedly, those defending the unimpeded ownership of everything from automatic weapons to bazookas will cite the fact that the Colorado murderer was stopped by an armed female whose action probably saved dozens of lives. Right. But understand that she was carrying her weapon as a volunteer security person at the Colorado Springs mega-church where the incident took place. Also, she had been a trained police officer in Minneapolis before moving to Colorado. She wasn't just some citizen who happened to be packing heat.

I can give you over 100 examples of this happening...you socialist...

[VeniVidiVici]

I believe the First Amendment is a collective right also that should be strictly regulated by the government.

Countless stories carrying just plain wrong or even classified information have led to numerous lives lost and have imperiled our servicemen and women not to mention our democracy.

Therefore I believe that all media be heavily regulated, licensed and censored by the government.

Goose, gander, yada, yada.

[Shadow Deamon]

"whether the Second Amendment gives individual Americans the right to bear whatever arms they choose or limits it to a collective right controlled by the state for the national defense."

What do we expect from someone who believes that our Constitution grants us our rights?

He betrays his ignorance in the first paragraph of his misinformed socialist screed.

[Marauder]

We face several threats as a nation, including trying to conduct a war against terrorism, and the accepted fact that many terrorist cells are lying in wait over here to spring into action when their leaders, hiding in caves in several of the "stan" countries in the Middle East, send them some signal. Add to this specter of utter danger the presence of armed inner-city gangs, e.g., Crips and Bloods, and armed ex-convict gangs, Aryan Brotherhood and Latin Kings, and oh, yes! Our not-so-homegrown "visiting" armed gangs such as MS-13 among others.

Am I the only one who considers groups like the KKK and the New Black Panthers nothing more than armed gangs of the same ilk?

Whose side does anyone believe Louis Farrakhan's armed gang, the Nation of Islam, will take in the event of an invasion of Islamofascist hordes?

Yet we still have fatuous Utopians like this Thomasson beating the drum of defeat. Damn them.

[basil]

Geeze, when he lists all the armed gangs in this country, I find it surprising that any law-abiding citizen is walking around unarmed.

[Camel Joe]

Sure you can come and take my guns... but I’m giving you the bullets FIRST!

[TexanToTheCore]

The justices read the same newspapers that we do and are aware of what is going on in the country.

The SCOTUSwill come down on the side of the individual’s right to bear arms.

Unbenownst to Liberals in this land Flight 93 as well as Colorado have changed the definition of responsible behavior in our society. It is proper to violently take out hijackers on air flights and it is a good thing to take down a terrorist in your church or other public area. This is a sea change in that previous to that the public was cautioned to let the authorities handle the situation. That is no longer the case and Sarah Brady and her minions are deeply miffed over these developments. I, on the otherhand, am very happy with it.

[Condor51]

with AK47 assault rifles never meant for civilian ownership

Oh really. Says who?

This screed is so STOO-PID^™ I swear it was written by some ditz reporterette.

[Marauder]

I swear it was written by some ditz reporterette.

No, see the tag at the bottom of the post: It was written by one Dan K. Thomasson, a ditz retired columnist. He wrote it on the 3rd, but I didn't see it until today, when our local liberal rag published it.

[El Gato]

But if the justices do not operate in a vacuum, then the two disturbed individuals who shot up an Omaha shopping mall and two Colorado religious centers with AK47 assault rifles never meant for civilian ownership will weigh heavily on their minds when they consider whether a lower court was correct in overturning the District of Columbia's super-strict gun law.

Umm, the AK-47 is no more powerful than one of these, although it holds a few more rounds

Or one of these, which can hold the same number of rounds, and fires the same bullets at about the same speed. It makes a great deer rifle, although you generally want to use expanding bullets rather than the more common (for the AK) full metal jacket type.

Both were built for the civilian market, and while a few police agencies use the second, the first is just a deer rifle, once the most common deer rifle in the country. That particular model, at least the basic design and the catridge it fires, is over 110 years old.

What a bunch of demagogs pretending to be "know nothings".

[robertpaulsen]

"then the recent carnage in Nebraska and Colorado will have no influence on its decision"

I didn't realize that the U.S. Constitution was to be interpreted with current events in mind.

[Travis McGee]

A typical liberal, with the mind of a six year old.

[Hazcat]

Needs a “MEGA BARF” alert.

[RJL]

But if the justices do not operate in a vacuum, then the two disturbed individuals who shot up an Omaha shopping mall and two Colorado religious centers with AK47 assault rifles never meant for civilian ownership will weigh heavily on their minds...

And I hope the justices will also note how effective the "No Guns" signs were in stopping the mentioned individuals.