Posted on 05/15/2008 1:28:25 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The political “hot button” issues of guns and judges have become intertwined in this election year. The fate of both issues will be decided by the candidate we elect as president. Why? Because over a four-year term, that president will likely appoint at least two and possibly three justices to the United States Supreme Court. Simply stated, this year when we elect a president, we will also cast our ballot for the next Supreme Court.
Everyone concerned about the Second Amendment and judicial accountability should heed John McCain’s speech to the NRA on May 16. The presumptive Republican nominee will speak directly to guns owners about the Second Amendment at the NRA’s Celebration of American Values event at the NRA Annual Meeting in Louisville, Kentucky.
And in America today, there has never been a greater opportunity or a greater threat to gun rights. In March, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the watershed case of District of Columbia v. Heller, a lawsuit challenging the DC gun ban. Residents of the District of Columbia are categorically prohibited from possessing handguns and operable long guns (rifles and shotguns) in their homes, even for self-defense.
The Heller case turns on whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms refers to private, law-abiding citizens, or whether it is a right of the people “collectively” to have guns only when they serve in the National Guard or a state-sponsored militia unit. The Court is scheduled to decide the case the third week in June.
Whatever the Court decides, that decision will shape gun rights in America for generations to come. The Heller decision will become the definitive standard for gun rights in America. The Second Amendment is the insurance policy on American liberty. And whether you own guns or not, you cannot afford for a single minute to think that it doesn’t matter to you, your family or the security of this country.
Just like other controversial decisions, such as those on religious liberty and free speech, the Heller decision will lead to many more questions than it answers.
When the Court decided Everson v. Board of Education in 1947 it created the doctrine of separation of church and state. For over 60 years this nation has grappled with what that doctrine means, in a raging cultural battle.
When the Court declared a previously unnoticed right to abortion in Roe v. Wade in 1973, America’s courts and presidential politics were thrust into an issue that still stirs deep passions and is ever present in political debates.
From now on, the same will be true of the Second Amendment. The Heller decision will launch 30 years of defining the nature and scope of gun rights in our courts. The Heller holding will likely be narrow, and will leave open countless other questions, such as what kinds of guns are protected, how far that right extends beyond your home, and whether the Second Amendment controls state law. At least some of these questions will find their way up to the Supreme Court years later. Who sits on the Court when those cases arrive matters a great deal to those of us who believe in the value of widespread lawful gun ownership in America.
That’s why the 2008 presidential election has unprecedented importance for gun owners. Despite their campaign rhetoric purporting to support the right to keep and bear arms, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are categorically opposed to our Second Amendment rights. Hillary Clinton opposed the 2005 tort reform law that saved the American gun industry from bankruptcy. Barack Obama has declared his opposition to all concealed carry laws. He has refused to repudiate his answer to a 1996 questionnaire, where he answered “yes” to a question asking if he supported laws banning “the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.” And Senator Obama’s true contempt for gun owners came out when he described us as “clinging” to our guns out of bitterness.
In contrast, presumptive Republican nominee John McCain joined bipartisan majorities on a Congressional amicus brief in the Supreme Court in DC v. Heller for the proposition that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. Both Clinton and Obama refused to sign that brief, instead supporting the District of Columbia’s law that prohibits its law-abiding residents from possessing any operable firearm at home, even for self-defense.
The president of the United States appoints all federal judges. Senator McCain has stated he will appoint justices like John Roberts and Sam Alito, and Antonin Scalia, all of whom seem likely to vote to uphold individual gun rights. Senator Obama, on the other hand, has promised to nominate liberal judicial activists and wants the Court to uphold the DC gun ban.
So who Americans elect as president this year will determine the fate of the Second Amendment. In electing a president we also elect a Supreme Court, and in the coming years the makeup of the High Court will be crucial in defining our rights.
For that reason I’m honored to serve on Senator McCain’s Justice Advisory Committee, and will do everything I can to make sure that America’s 90 million gun owners elect a president who will appoint Supreme Court justices faithful to the text of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment.
Gun owners are very sensible people. America’s heartland is filled with people devoted to faith, family and classic American values like lawful gun ownership for hunting, recreation and self-defense. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama could learn a lot from them, but I doubt they’ll be joining us at the NRA convention.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Froman is the immediate past president of the National Rifle Association of America, only the second woman and the first Jewish American to hold that office in the 136-year history of the NRA. The views expressed are her own and not that of any organization.
Unfortunately for all of we who are conservative, this article is absolutely true. It’s McCain appointing, or 2-3 new Ginsberg clones. No matter his statement about Ginsberg being good, he won’t appoint another of her.
This and WOT are the issues for me.
I agree with the sentiments of both of you. McCain seems to be trying to run on a platform only a little right of the ‘Rats and continually pisses me off. He seems to think he can win without any conservatives at all. And maybe God will be merciful on us and only give McCain a couple of months in the WH before he takes him, hopefully leaving us with a strong conservative for president.
” You can also rest assured that if Barack Hussein Obama wins the general election, there will be no United States of America as we now know it four years hence. I put it to you: Which is more important?”
Oh stop it. That’s the kind of paranoia that got McCain nominated in the first place.
You’re thinking of Anna Nicole Smith.
As for the Hollywood stuff, I have to disagree with you there. I voted for Reagan twice and I remember those times very clearly. He had not been an actor in more than 20 years at that time. It’s not as if he was a super famous actor either. Sure, he had some leading roles, but for the most part he was a b-movie actor.
People fell in love with Reagan when he became governor of California. Nationally, he gained a following during the 1976 election campaign. Also, during the late 70’s he made a lot of speeches and radio broadcasts that put him at the forefront of the conservative movement. If you think he was just some good looking figurehead you are falling into the trap that the democrats fell in during that time. He was a man of substance and by the time most men are in their 70’s lets not kid ourselves. We’re past the sex symbol time.
If it’s all about good looking movie acting sex symbols, then I guess George Clooney should be running any time now and we’ll all fall over ourselves getting to the poles to vote for him. He couldn’t even get his Dad elected to a congressional seat a few years back in Kentucky.
“Lest anyone think there is no difference, here are the ACU ratings (lifetime/2005):
McCain 83/80, Obama 8/8.”
The ACU is meaningless. They only count votes that they happen to make, and ignore missed votes. It’s not a reliable indicator of conservatism.
we have fallen so far of the path because we keep voting FOR evil [lesser or otherwise by voting 'against' a beastie] instead of FOR PRINCIPAL and letting the results speak for themselves...
Since I was given no voice in 'choosing' a nominee [primary here aint even happened yet], Ill be damned if anybody is going to tell me how I must support something that in my heart I know is wrong...
lemme go ahead and write it for you...'ObamnaBeast '08'...=..."Gilbos_Fault"...
Feel better ???
LFOD...
You know, I was just thinking that if I didn’t have two daughters I might just vote for Obama Hussein. He’s sure to raise hell amongst conservatives and bring in national obediance/acceptance of the Religion of Peace rugriders. That should be a firefight that we’d all remember.
I’ve seen more than a few arguments that say they shouldn’t be American citizens. I think this invasion was planned out years ago. Maybe in the 70’s by Kissinger and that crowd.
The question boils down to, “Would you rather drink arsenic by choice, or risk being forced to drink cyanide.”
Vote RINO! Hey, you might survive the arsenic!
They may not be perfect (what is?) but ACU ratings are far from "meaningless." It's just that kind of exaggeration which is going to lead to national disaster, if it causes people to stay home or vote for some loser 3rd party, letting Obamie the Commie become President.
I would be very surprised if conservative people like Duncan Hunter don't support McCain in the fall. Certainly Fred Thompson will.
It is meaningless because it’s dishonest. I’m not looking for a perfect system, but a system that at least acknowledges that a conservative is not someone who just shows up to vote on 10(8 which the ACU agrees with) of the 25 issues. His real number for last year is 32.
McCain is going to win. You people are wasting your energy with this paranoia. We need to expose McCain at every turn and make it abundantly clear that Americans don’t want his eco-socialist policies.
"We must accept illegal immigrants to atone for slavery" is pro-enforcement?
The Dem crossovers and the media shoved McCain down our throats — not paranoia. And as far as the probability that Obama will permanently adversely alter the nation? He will change the voter demographics to the point were we will never again see a Republican president or congress. Remember those 20 million illegals lurking out there? (And open borders to swell their ranks?)
Maybe Conservatives are busy working.
That’s why you see the Liberals able to put out numbers anywhere, at any time.
Better do it now, while you still can.
This thinking always confuses the dickens out of me. Isn't the idea to vote for someone who actually represents your views and core convictions? Do you think that Bob Barr might actually have a better chance if everyone who thought the way that you do actually voted for him? With all due respect, thinking along your lines is a great part of the reason that we don't have a conservative republican in the race at this point. Voting has been reduced to a game of trying to determine who is going to win in the end and jumping on that team -- principles be damned.
Jeez, that was very well to-the-point.
Have you seen that nice Mexican building in the state of Arkansas?
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.