Posted on 04/09/2008 9:31:41 AM PDT by neverdem
Shooting blanks: Shea-Porter and guns
REP. CAROL Carol Shea-Porter has a gun problem.
Specifically, she seems unsure of her position on the 2nd Amendment. She has always proclaimed herself a supporter of the 2nd Amendment's declaration that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." It is what she thinks that statement means, however, that is unclear.
For years, the District of Columbia has prohibited its residents from owning handguns. Dick Heller, a D.C. special police officer, and five other residents sued, and the case went before the U.S. Supreme Court last month. Every member of New Hampshire's congressional delegation except Carol Shea-Porter signed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs in their effort to overturn the ban.
On WMUR, Shea-Porter was asked to explain her thoughts on the case. She said:
"Well, I'll tell you. I support the 2nd Amendment as well. And I come from a state where people hunt. I understand that. I've lived in the North Country, and I support their right to hunt. I support all that. However, there is another issue: states' rights. And so I am waiting for the court to make a decision about this.
"And there are two different issues here. And we also want to make sure we protect states' rights. In New Hampshire we're very, very big on that. I mean, look at our reaction to the federal ID. But we don't want it. So here we have a case where one state, or in this case the District of Columbia, is passing rules for themselves, and the federal government's coming in, and I'm stepping aside until we decide what comes, and you know, who has the priority here. Is it a states' rights issue, or, or exactly how will it shake out?"
Where to begin?
First, the District of Columbia is not a state and does not share "states' rights."
Second, does Rep. Shea-Porter really believe the Founding Fathers were concerned about losing their right to hunt? If so, why did they mention militias in the 2nd Amendment and not hunters?
Third, if you have no opinion on whether "states' rights" trump the 2nd Amendment, then you don't support the 2nd Amendment, which guarantees the individual right to bear arms in self defense. What other constitutional rights does Rep. Shea-Porter think states can override?
We asked Rep. Shea-Porter's office to clarify her position on the 2nd Amendment. We asked if she believes that the amendment guarantees the right to own handguns. We received no response last week.
However, we did inadvertently receive an e-mail from Rep. Shea-Porter's chief of staff who forwarded our query to his boss, preceding it with a question, "Do you want to answer this?"
As we never got a response, we guess the answer was "no."
This is why these people run for office... they can see multiple issues inside of one thing.
There is one and only ONE issue. The Second Amendment. The right to keep and bear arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
How asinine. I thought it was understood that the Constitution already trumped states rights.
“Well, I’ll tell you. I support the 2nd Amendment as well. And I come from a state where people hunt. I understand that. I’ve lived in the North Country, and I support their right to hunt. I support all that....”
For the umpteenth time, and for those Leftist cretins who still don’t get it, the Second Amendment is NOT about hunting.
This month’s Combat Handguns magazine (HK pistol on the cover) has an article on the 2nd Amendment by Massad Ayoob.
He cites Free Republic and an unknown freeper’s comments. Sorry, I couldn’t locate it to post.
They can find a penumbra in the Const. but can’t find a right?
bump
I wonder how strong Rep. Shea-Porter’s enthusiasm would be for “State’s Rights” were DC to pass a law placing “reasonable restrictions” on the exercise of the 19th Amendment.
REP. CAROL Carol Shea-Porter has a gun problem.
No, Carol has a MENTAL problem. (1)
Besides the OBVIOUS that Washington D.C. is not a state, her ramblings about "states' rights" and the 2A are nonsensical MORONIC.
For one it's apparent she's never heard of the 'Supremacy Clause' in the US Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2), and secondly not the 10th Amendment in the Bill of Rights.
Now you'd think she would have at least a hint about the 10th given her concern for "States' Rights" which it specifically addresses.
(1) I KNEW that 19th Amendment thingy was a bad idea but no one would listen. Giving women like Carol the right to vote, sheesh, how dumb can ya get. Hey! Maybe her state can repeal it. Annnnnnd bring back Slavery and Indentured Servitude too!!! But not for blacks, just for STOOPID people like Carol.
States rights only pertains to(most) power not specifically granted to the federal gov, nor inviduals rights laid out in the bill of rights and forthcoming amendments.
The 10th does not nor should it infringe upon our second amendment rights protected in the Constituton. This only proves one thing: Carol-Shea Porter is an idiot and does not understand the Constitution, this should preclude her from running for Congress. It also means that (most) politicans only use “states rights”, second Amendment rights, ect rhetorically when it benefits them (mosty around elections). I’d respect them more if there were just honest and said they don’t believe in the 2nd Amendment and would like to repeal that Amendment!
At least then we’d have a fair fight (and we’d win ;-).
I’ve never understood why liberals see an unquestionable right to an abortion in the constitution but can’t seem to grasp the specifically worded part about the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Very strange.
> They can find a penumbra in the Const. but can’t find a right?
The Left selects which rights to defend according to whether they are congruent to the Left’s agenda.
I live in NH.
The commies pretty much took over the state in the election debacle of 2006.
Timothy Dunn (D), one of the sponsors of NH SB337, which changes NH from a state friendly to homeschooling to one that is hostile to it, recently quoted Plato saying, “Demands for Freedom are the Demise of Democracies,” in response to queries concerning the draconian, anti-homeschool measures in SB337.
He is on record as saying he believes that to be true.
He is a FASCIST!
He is a TOTALITARIAN STATIST!
You are allowed to exercise only those “rights” he and his fellow travelers on the Left deem as valid.
Like the right to murder infants before, during, and shortly after they are born.
Like the right of young minors to be prematurely sexualized by having access to pornography in the town library, thereby making it easier for adults to perpetrate sexual mischief on minors.
Like the right of sexual perverts to obtain the blessings of the State for their deviancy by recognizing such relationships as “marriage”.
Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter yesterday raised concerns with the Navy over the comparatively low levels of funding that Portsmouth Naval Shipyard has received in recent years. In a hearing of the House Armed Services Military Personnel Subcommittee, Shea-Porter asked Defense Department and Navy officials to explain why the Navy has not requested funding for any construction projects at Portsmouth since 1971.
well all you NH dips that stayed home instead of voting for Bradley because he wasnt “perfect” get what you pay for
i voted
my wife voted
apparently no one else did
Evidently the Feds convinced them that they can't live without it because all 50 States have accepted the plan.
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.