Marcorandazza
“All comments are welcome and unmoderated. However, I’d ask that you try and keep things on topic.”

Cute how that came 12 hours after your “homeland security watch list” comment.

How is one form of propaganda, your little joke, allowed, while another, that murder rates will go up, not?

Love the 1st Amendment approach to the largest 2nd Amendment decision in years. This post began off topic.

Cheers

There is a post, here about the Second Amendment issue in this case.

Heller is a narrow victory, but I’ll take it. The anti-gun crowd has started crowing about “blood in the streets,” a re-run of their predictions for states which have adopted concealed carry in the past 20 years. Their predictions proved false then, and they will prove false in the instant case.

I’m willing to make the prediction that the decision will not negatively affect the murder rate in DC since gang-bangers do not pay attention to statutes and supreme court decisions anyway. Anyone want to place a bet?

I am also curious of the use of “conservatives” and “liberals” in the context of the Supreme Court and the current political structure. It is interesting that the majority are deemed the conservatives while their decision is liberal. The granting and protecting of rights is a liberal ideology. In fact, the NRA (conservatives) sabbotaged the Second Amendment ruling many times prior to Heller. The covervatives were worried about a change in the current gun owenership landscape. The liberals, on the other hand, were worried about the conservatives obtaining guns. It is circular logic and point to the unreasonable use of labels.

If the conservatives were truly conservative, they would leave the Second Amendment issue alone. The current landscape worked for 200yrs. Thus the conservative positions was set. The liberals should be the flag waivers for change. Labels are dumb.

It should not matter which national convention the Justices follow. Individual rights, especially those found in the Bill of Rights, are not open to political debate. The debate should be over Framers intent, history, tradition, and precedent. What if Clinton appointed one more justice? What if Scalia fell dead? The outcome of the Heller case should not turn on the hanging chad of a Supreme Court Justice.

Jonathon Blevins

(had the Second Amendment in the Supreme Court bracket this year…everyone else had it going out in the Sweet Sixteen)

Of course, their fears are mostly irrational, since all of the most senior Justices on the Court were among the dissenters. But it’s still funny to see the Conservatives worrying about the thin margin of the Court that they perceive to be protecting their view.