I probably should be gleeful, but…
Posted by TFG on June 26th, 2008
Supreme Court says Americans have right to guns - Yahoo! News
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, “In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas.”
Yeah, I’m pretty sure the 2nd Amendment was intended for barns in low-crime rural areas. And for elitists with 24/7 security. Not where they’re needed, by whom they’re needed.
In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority “would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.”
Actually, you know, the Framers did indeed make a choice to limit elected officials, you internationalist moron. They called it the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, and the Bill of Rights. You might should check those out, Justice Stevens.
Crikey, where do we find these people, and how do they ascend to this level? But it’s not as if these statements come as a surprise to anyone, do they?
June 26th, 2008 at 9:35 am
Scott, what scares me the most if that something as clear and basic as this comes out as 5-4. No prizes guessing who the four are either. One more vote, or just a little more “growth” by Justice Kennedy is all that is needed for the US Constitution to be not only a living document, but a constantly mutating one as well.
June 26th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Fortunately the four are aging, but, then, so are most of the five. No one who cares about these issues can afford to ever vote Dem for president again, since presidents appoint the court. The voting is too close for comfort. In practical terms, it would be like the old Texas flag, “Come And Take It,” but it would not be fun to be arrested for “possession” after defending yourself with a handgun.
June 26th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
The 5-4 split worries me also-this coulda been bad. And as far as the “where do we get these people” thing, well, what kind of arse-hole would really want to live and work in the arse-hole that is DC-there’s something *seriously* fecked in the heads of the politicians and fawning gummint camp followers who live in the Virginia and Maryland suburbs in their million-dollar houses that would cost a tenth of that in the “red” states.
Oh well, celebrate for today and continue the good fight for gun rights, sez I.
The R Man
June 26th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Sheesh.
I am a Texan. I get the gun thang.
And I don’t believe your right to shoot off anything was truly in jeopardy, now was it? You know as well as I that there is not an official anywhere that thinks he can really get away with the “take away your gun” law.
Yep, the presidential power potential for the next fours years gives me the shudders, but for different reasons than your own… Balance, boys, balance.
And I know that Federal law trumps our puny states’ laws any time, but sometimes (hell, a lot of the time) the Feds get it all wrong for people living in Texas - that is MY main gripe, no matter what the party line rhetoric.
June 27th, 2008 at 7:33 am
I’d say you don’t get the ‘gun thang’, Pattie, not even one tiny bit.
Let’s try it this way — Ft. Worth passes a law saying that you can’t own a laptop in your home at all unless you’re licensed for it, and that if you do have one, it must be kept disassembled at all times or under lock and key, so as to prevent you from blogging at will without direct supervision of a superior. Same goes for a desktop, except they’re allowed to anybody, but they still have to be kept disassembled or under lock and key when it’s not in use. Are you happy with that? Think you can live with that? I’ll tell you right now that there are plenty of people who wouldn’t be the least bit bothered by it since they don’t use a computer every day, and definitely don’t exercise their free speech rights on any kind of regular basis.
Yeah, I’d say that the officials actually do think they can get away with a ‘take away your gun’ law. See Breyer and Stevens quoted above. What are they but officials, and what do their statements (regulation, no untouchable right) represent? See Obama. See Chicago. See SF. See New York. See the DC law that started this particular case. Yes, there are plenty of assholes that think they know better. Thankfully, there aren’t many of them Texas, but I don’t expect that to last more than another 20 years. Unless I keep fighting back by teaching people how to shoot.
And blog, too — I don’t want the Bright Boys and Girls to take away free speech, either.
June 27th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Gotcha.
And I like being “Bright”! I have always been bright, (my teachers and my mamma said so) and smartassed to boot. As long as there isn’t a law against that, I’m good.
And p.s., it won’t be the brighties that take away free speech…
And isn’t this funny (except it is painful to acknowledge):
Each “side” thinks the other is evil, trying to dispose of civil liberties, and is a dangerous kook.
So there ya go (to quote Mr. Imus).
June 27th, 2008 at 8:54 am
And p.s., it won’t be the brighties that take away free speech…
You can count on it. It’s always the ones that think they’re smarter than everybody else. There’s your evil.
June 27th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Oh, and here’s the thing about the Supreme Court.
The Court has become partisan.
Nearly every decision coming down for the past few years has been 5 to 4. You KNOW that is a party line division.
The Court should NOT be whipping boys/girls for our corrupted two parties; party line propaganda should NEVER enter into the decisions - but it does.
(from the website: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/about.html)
And I like Chief Justice Marshall’s quote:
“We must never forget that it is a
we are expounding…intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs.”
Did you know America has the oldest written Constitution still in force?
That’s what makes us great - we agree to disagree (except for that little war of northern aggression…)
June 27th, 2008 at 9:20 am
I’m tired of arguing with you, anyway, FG. We ain’t never gonna meet in the middle of river, I can see.
But, you are still a good Texas son
June 27th, 2008 at 9:31 am
And if we were lost in the wilderness, I’d want you for my trail buddy…you’d always have my back.
So, there!
June 27th, 2008 at 9:43 am
I don’t see any crisis on the horizon that requires any constitutional amendments. The Supremes just confirmed that, by agreeing with the Founders on RKBA, though it was a close-run thing, and too close for comfort for me.
Partisanship is just another way of saying competing philosophies. The distinctions are the same as they ever was…statists vs. libertarians. Control vs. freedom. The Supremes reflect that, just like Congress, and pretty much everything else. That’s the genius of the Founders, visible right there, and why I tend to lean towards what those guys said, not what some bright boy thinks they might possibly have meant in relation to current failed or failing internationalist, non-American bullshit. That’s why we still have the oldest written Constitution still in force, and why we should be very careful in screwing with it.
Or in jacking with it every chance we get, as your philosophical outlook demands. Maybe it does suck. Maybe it does need more changing and updating, since it’s so damn old.
I’m not arguing, just observing.
June 27th, 2008 at 9:47 am
Uh huh. LOL
And BTW, MY philosophical leaning is not necessarily what you might think….I don’t fit in any one-sized category, thank you, and neither do you.
I think that’s what set us apart as Texans, you know.
June 27th, 2008 at 10:26 am
No, I’m really not. I gave up arguing on the internet. It’s a pointless waste of time.
I also don’t make assumptions about people’s philosophies on the internet unless they throw it right out there.
June 27th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Hey I admit it, I make assumptions about people all the time. The funny thing though is people think they know what my assumptions are, because I guess they think I think like they do.