Gun Rights and Legal Quackery

The case that has been accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court on the Chicago gun ban highlights a certain aspect of American jurisprudence that needs a correction.

This issue is discussed in depth in my new essay at Columbia Conservative Examiner.

Although it is a shame that things have come to this in the United States of America, the Court has a golden opportunity to correct a glaring error with regard to our gun rights.

Second Amendment News Roundup for 9/30/09

Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

Western Rifle Shooters Association has a doozy of a must-read entitled, 'Living in an Imperial World.'

Vanderboegh reports that a group known as 'rainy day patriots' are going to take their protests directly to an outlet of the state-run media--CNN, which his headquartered in Atlanta.

Brigid blogs about home improvement at her home on the range. Take a look at that yellow tool. Looks like a mean firearm to me.

Robb Allen informs us that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that will decide if the 2nd Amendment applies to the states. It's a shame we have reached a point in this nation when this is even an issue. We don't, for example, assume that the First Amendment doesn't necessarily apply to the states. I went under the assumption that the Bill of Rights--the 1st 10 Amendments--is protected for all U.S. citizens. Then revisionist lawyers got in the mix and introduced this thing called 'incorporation.' Geeezzzz!

David Codrea has the complete story and commentary on the gun ban case to go to the Supreme Court.

Kurt Hofmann also weighs in on the issue.

Ride Fast and Shoot Straight adds his thoughts to the discussion on the SCOTUS case.

Walls of the City asks a key question concerning this gun rights care before the SCOTUS.

Texas Fred presents a guest-post today entitled, 'Liberals are Killing America' by Alan Caruba. Good reading!

Days of our Trailers reports on the shenanigans of some LEFTWING domestic terrorists. Funny how you never hear about THEM from the present government!

The Rustmeister points to a fellow that has been designated by Kool-Aid drinkers as a member of the 'mob.' He should wear the title with pride.

Say Uncle has the bizarre story of a grandmother arrested for buying cold medicine.

Caleb at Gun Nuts recaps last night's edition of Gun Nuts Radio, along with downloads.

Alphecca reports news on guns locked up in cars on college campuses.

Sebastian says that the Joyce Foundation conducted a study that concludes gun owners are stupid. I would comment on that, but I think I would get thrown off Blogger and the Internet altogether.

Tam alerts us to the 'Survival 101' textbook. Good reading!

The Black Sphere has a must-read entitled, 'Kinder Gentler Nuclear Iran.'

Nicki shows us the undeniable truth which vindicates Joe Wilson's claim that Obama is lying about there being no coverage for illegal aliens in the healthcare proposals.

Way Up North provides 2 vital quotes of the day, one from Barry Goldwater and the other from Ronald Reagan.

Free in Idaho highlights some more lies coming out of the Democrats in Congress concerning healthcare.

And Now, the Parade of the Turncoats

Nine (9) Republican turncoats vote along with Democrats to confirm Sonia Sotomayor for the U.S. Supreme Court.

Hint--Lindsey Graham of South Carolina was one of them, but this time John McCain was NOT.

Read the rest at the link above to find out who else is on the ultimate blacklist.

SCOTUS Gets To Sit on It's Arse

From the War on Guns:

Who's surprised that rather than just recognize and protect our unalienable rights--the whole reason we feed these bastards in the first place--that ritual is given more importance than the reason behind it?

So now SCOTUS can sit on its hands, continue to allow injustice and deprivation of rights to exist unchallenged, and allow the pot to continue its gradual progression to full boil.

David Codrea presents the entire scenario that led to this travesty.

10 Questions Senators Won't Ask Sotomayor (But I Will)

I will be willing to wager you won't hear a single Senator ask these 10 questions of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, but I will.

Read all about it at Columbia Conservative Examiner.

Today marks the beginning of Senate confirmation hearings for Sotomayor. All Americans should DEMAND that she give an accounting for the 10 questions/issues I cite!

SOTOMAYOR ALERT!

In a major embarrassment for the Obama Administration and Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a lower court ruling issued by Sotomayor that denied promotions to white firefighters in Connecticut based upon their race.

Sotomayor had ruled that minority firefighters were entitled to the promotions in spite of the fact that they did not do as well on a key test as the white firefighters.

The ruling by Sotomayor had set off a firestorm of controversy revolving around the issue of 'reverse discrimination.'

And the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court today is a stunning setback for Barack Obama, Sonia Sotomayor, and the Democrats on the Hill who are determined to place her on the high court.

This is not the first time Sotomayor's court decisions have been overturned. In fact, her decisions have been overturned by higher courts more than any other judge in the federal system.

The question is, will the SCOTUS ruling today be enough to deny Sotomayor a seat on the high court? Remember, Democrats have an overwhelming majority in Congress, and they have demonstrated again and again that they will engage in corruption, scandal, and arrogance, refusing to investigate corruption in their own ranks.

They may well railroad Sotomayor onto the Supreme Court in spite of her obvious incompetence.

Senators on the Hill need to near from the citizens that we will not tolerate any more shenanigans on their part to engage in blatant partisanship no matter what the consequences. They may well discover just how severe are the consequences come November of 2010.

ALERT! Sotomayor Ruled Against Gun Rights!

This is a breaking news alert from the Second Amendment Foundation.

Judge Sotomayor, a New York native, ruled on a Second Circuit Appeals Court panel that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo. This ruling is in direct conflict with a Ninth Circuit Court ruling in the Nordyke v. King case in California that the Second Amendment is incorporated through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Thus, this is proof positive that Barack Obama has just nominated to the SCOTUS an anti-gun bigot who would vote to rob the citizens of their 2nd Amendment rights.

Time for action, my friends!

Second Amendment News Roundup for 5/26/09

Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

David Hardy at Of Arms and the Law informs us he has been diagnosed with cancer and is having surgery TODAY. Be sure to keep him in your thoughts and prayers.

Michelle Malkin has a complete bio and run-down of opinion on Sonia Sotomayor, Obama's new Supreme Court nominee.

Mike McCarville provides late-breaking reaction to the Sotomayor nomination from Senator Tom Coburn.

Alphecca notes that there doesn't appear to be much out there concerning Sotomayor's views on guns and gun control.

Western Rifle Shooters Association has a vital must-read on how quickly pension plans are being depleted in this country. Cause for alarm...

Snow Flakes in Hell posts the results of the NRA Board of Directors election.

Sipsy Street Irregulars says that business-people are now discovering what gun owners have known all along about excessive gov't regulation.

Say Uncle reports some important news on D.C. gun crime post-Heller.

Codrea's Gun Rights Examiner wants to know how many people out there would be in favor of 'German gun control.'

Breda says that tonight's edition of Gun Nuts Radio will feature a special guest from a nationally-known TV show. Take a look for details...

Kurt Hofmann writes (sarcastically) that THIS is how the jackbooted thugs of the ATF 'keep us safe.'

Robb Allen posts a story on a missing gun that led to a most unusual ending.

From Standing By: 'And If a Consensus of 'Experts' Told You to Jump off a Cliff?'

Nicki provides an interesting read entitled, 'Davy Crockett on Sympathy and Spending.'

Every Blade of Grass points to a new Obama-approved weapon. Photo included.

Tam has an 'insider leak' on an unreleased Barry O campaign video.

From Pax Parabellum: "Maryland Millionaires 'Go Galt.'"

Brigid shares some interesting photos and commentary on the .45 Colt--the 'Snake Slayer.'

John Jacob H has a good read on why hunting is important.

Way Up North provides a shooting range report from the great state of Alaska...

The Wandering Minstrel shows off his skills at the range as well.

The Newbius Papers wants to put together a blog meet for gun and liberty bloggers in the D.C.-northern Virginia area. Take a look for details...

Notoriously Conservative says that Obama needs to 'grow a pair' with regard to North Korean nukes.

Live from the Upper Texas Gulf Coast wants to know why college professors are so darned afraid of guns.

Around O-Town notes that 'this car says it all.' Photos and commentary included.

SCOTUS Gun Redux: Back to the Fight

We won, and victory is sweet. Despite significant differences of opinion between the majority and minority on the Court, all 9 Justices affirmed that the Second Amendment refers, at least to some degree, to an individual right.

Precedence has been set for recognizing that self-defense through the use of firearms is a basic human right, and that is a victory worth celebrating.

But now it is time to get back to the fight.

As wonderful as Justice Antonin Scalia's words were in upholding the notion of an individual right within the Second Amendment, this Court is notorious for recognizing a right without making provision for protecting that right.

No greater example of this can be found than the Court's recognition that individual, private property rights are guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution. But the Court has failed on several different occasions to extend legal protections to those citizens who have suffered through blatant violations of their property rights.

Ilya Somin's excellent post at The Volokh Conspiracy provides a sobering warning to those who think that today's Court ruling on gun rights will insure the legal protection of gun owners who must fight for their right to bear arms in the courts.

And make no mistake about it, the forces of anti-freedom will come out of the woodwork to fight harder than ever to restrict Second Amendment rights in any way they can. The Brady Campaign, for example, is already using the Court's decision to rally the troops to raise more money to fight gun rights.

In addition, we can look for a growing movement to repeal the Second Amendment altogether.

As JR points out, before the ink was dry on the Supreme Court's decision the Chicago Tribune was already calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment on its editorial page.

Further, we all know that had Al Gore or John Kerry won in 2000 and 2004, the Court's decision today would have been much different. We are only one vote away from losing a guaranteed right, and neither Roberts nor Alito would have been there to join with the majority.

A Barack Obama Presidency will guarantee a total shift in the makeup of the Court, and despite his flip-flop statement yesterday claiming he supports the Second Amendment, we can rest assured that his appointees to the Court will be in the mold of Ginsberg, Souter, Breyer, and Stevens.

This shameful gang of 4 all dissented from the majority opinion that D.C.'s gun ban must be struck down.

It is for this reason, perhaps, that Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership delayed issuing a response to Thursday's decision on Heller. That response is now on the website of the JPFO. The statement is a realistic assessment of the issues we face.

And thus, let us not be lulled into a false sense of security. We have won a major battle, but the war still rages.

And once again, it is time to fight.

For more thoughts on the Court's decision, click here and here.

Second Amendment News Roundup Special Edition 6/26/08

This is a special edition of the Second Amendment News Roundup.

The United States Supreme Court ruled today that Americans have the right to own and keep firearms--including handguns--in their homes. The ruling struck down a District of Columbia law banning handguns.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia stated that the record of history both before and after the ratification of the Second Amendment shows that individual citizens have the right to their preferred method of self-protection--the handgun.

The ruling also struck down D.C.'s requirement for safety locks or keeping the firearms disassembled.

The ruling does, however, leave intact many local regulations on the use of firearms.

Shockingly, the decision came with a 5-4 majority. In dissent were Stevens, Breyer, Ginsberg, and Souter, which shows that our precious right to self-defense in this country is a tenuous one.

In fact, the anti-freedom crowd is already attempting to spin the decision to its benefit...Nancy Pelosi being one of them, stating that 'D.C. still has the right to regulate handguns.'

Joining Justice Scalia in the majority were Alito, Roberts, Kennedy, and Thomas.

Naturally, the blogosphere is ablaze with commentary and analysis of the decision. The following is a run-down on the comments of various bloggers:

Let the celebration begin! The Breda Fallacy helps to get us started.

David Hardy at Of Arms and the Law quotes from Justice Scalia's majority opinion, and he follows up with highlighting the major key points in the ruling.

Say Uncle says the 5-4 ruling is too close for comfort. Uncle also has some Key Quotes from the ruling.

Snowflakes in Hell opines on what should scare us about this ruling and says that there is room to work.

David Codrea at The War on Guns provides insightful commentary on the decision, stating that the ruling leaves the door open for continued infringement.

Robb Allen reminds us that this decision is not a call to victory but a call to battle. It ain't over by a long shot.

Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs gives her take on the Heller decision, including a comment on what it might mean to Jihadists.

Nicki at The Liberty Zone weighs in on the decision, including some sharp words for the turncoats, I mean, dissenters.

Tam at View from the Porch does a bit of well-deserved gloating.

Traction Control has the text version of the decision in two separate formats.

The Bitch Girls recognize and thank the key players in today's decision. Had it not been for these valuable persons in the cause, this may have never happened. Go have a look.

Eugene Volokh at The Volokh Conspiracy is one of the ones Bitter Bitch cites as a valuable person in the cause, providing crucial legal guidance. Volokh is cited in the Heller decision as well. You can find plenty of commentary on the Court's action at The Volokh Conspiracy here. Simply scroll down for a variety of commentary and analysis.

Clayton Cramer is another who was cited in the majority opinion, and he provides his take on the ruling here.

Dustin's Gun Blog highlights the 'individual right' aspect of the Heller decision.

Dr. John Lott quotes D.C. Mayor Fenty who is still attempting to act as if the Heller case has not been decided. What a complete idiot.

Michelle Malkin reports that John McCain has jumped on the Heller decision to underscore his differences with Barack Obama on gun rights. And, not surprisingly, Obama does another 'flip flop' on the issue. I suppose now he is the 'Thomas Jefferson candidate' for unrestricted gun rights. ROFL!!

Mike McCarville is reporting that many are applauding the Heller decision today, including U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe.

But wait till you see THIS stunner! McCarville also issues a news alert that a Leftwing blogger is ridiculing the Heller decision on the basis of the 'racial angle.'

Ahab points to a very important component of the Heller decision, which states that the Second Amendment codifies a pre-existing right.

Alphecca comments on the potential ramifications of Heller for the states and for the Chicago ban.

Armed and Safe points to the response of the Brady Bunch to the decision.

Gun Pundit makes an excellent point about the decision today being an affirmation of an old right rather than a 'new right.' He also breaks the thing down into a step-by-step analysis.

Gunservatively highlights a statement in the Heller decision that declares it is not the Court's role to declare the Second Amendment extinct. Read it all.

The various gun websites offer their commentary on the decision. Click on the underscored links to go to the statements issued by Gun Law News, the NRA, the Buckeye Firearms Association, Gun Owners of America, and Ohioans for Concealed Carry.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership has not yet released a statement.

Among the major political websites, statements on the Heller decision can be found at The Cato Institute, Human Events (which features an excellent article by Ted Nuggent), and National Review Online (which catches Barack Obama in a blatant lie about his position on gun rights).

I hope this collection of links will be helpful to you as we continue to decipher the ramifications of the Court's action today.

Supreme Court Decides Gun Rights Case Today

The District of Columbia vs. Heller gun rights case will be decided today by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court will issue all remaining decisions, including Heller, today at 10 AM.

For a minute-by-minute liveblog of the Court's public session, click here to go to SCOTUSblog (Supreme Court of the United States blog), beginning at 10 AM EDT.

At issue is the constitutionality of the ban on handguns within the District of Columbia. Observers say this will be the most significant high court ruling on the Second Amendment in the past 100 years.

LIBERTY ALERT! SCOTUS UPHOLDS VOTER ID

In a stunning decision that is sure to totally revamp the manner in which voting is done in the nation, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Indiana law requiring photo voter I.D.

The Court ruled that requiring proper photo identification at the polls is NOT a violation of Constitutional rights.

It is our opinion that the ruling is long overdue. It is also a stinging defeat for Democrats who tend to favor 'open voting' and a major victory for Republicans who wish to thwart illegal activity at the voting booth.

Thus, the door is open for many more states to pass voter photo I.D. laws that target illegal aliens and other forms of voter fraud such as persons using the names of the deceased in order to vote more than once.

The High Court is to be congratulated for a good ruling today.