Heller And The Election
Some commenters out there, among them Instapundit, say that the decision in Heller today takes gun rights off the table as an election issue. I beg to differ.
The decision was 5-4. That means that everything could change if a Justice is confirmed whose views are more in line with Obama's views (which appear to have changed) of a while back. Don't forget that he lives in a state that is one of two that are totally out of touch on this issue. The two? Illinois and Wisconsin. The only two states in the nation that do not have some form of concealed carry laws.
Of course what are the odds of getting another Justice Thomas? Higher with McCain than Obama. FWIW.
For some background on the case visit Clayton Cramer.
Cross Posted at Classical Values
Posts
2 comments:
Amen brother!
David
The Second Amendment right announced in Heller was the same right, in essence, that the Brits had in 1776. Indeed, they received in their own Bill of Rights as against the crown in 1689. That said, this provided no limit on Parliament who, between 1928 and today have taken away not only a right to keep and bear firearms, but essentially any defensive weapon in Britain.
Heller in some ways makes the decision much like Britain. It explicitly makes of the 2nd Am. a federal right, but not a limitation on state action. Unless and until that happens, a state could today completely ban weapons.
And then there is the rest of the contour of the 2nd Amendment.
I agree with you completely. Heller didn't take gun rights off the table - it put them squarely in play. Linked. http://wolfhowling.blogspot.com/2008/06/interesting-posts-from-around-web-1_30.html
Post a Comment