Reply With Quote
how did sotomayor vote?
how did sotomayor vote?
She voted against the ruling.
obama appointee voting against gun owners, not a shocker.
now we have another obama appointee coming in... great.
Awesome. Thank you, conservatives, for yet again affirming that a person like me can buy as many handguns as I please no matter where I am. I'm very glad you have your rights. I'm very glad I have mine. Such lenience bodes very well for our collective future.
6 of the 9 current ones were Republican appointments.
Odds are very good, if Obama gets a second term, that he will get another 1 or 2.
The thing is that once they get in, they tend to disappoint their backers almost universally, and (gasp!) develop their own opinions.
Much ado about nothing, although no liberal in their right mind isn't secretly wishing Scalia would retire.
I don't think Scalia, Roberts, Uncle Tom, Alito have disappointed ANY right-wingers.
no eye roll needed. Sotomayor voted against gun owners rights. Who's surprised?
Unfortunately, looks like Obama will have appointed 1/3 of the SC by time time he's gone, like you said.
Stock up while you can.
Just one more good reason to defeat him in 2012.Odds are very good, if Obama gets a second term, that he will get another 1 or 2.
Haha, you're a tool. Obama is replacing perhaps the most liberal member of the court, with someone likely to be far less liberal.
Justice John Paul Stevens Is Wrong About Gun Rights, Again
Posted on June 28, 2010, 12:24PM | Damon W. Root
Two things jump right out of Justice John Paul Stevens’ lengthy dissent in today’s landmark gun rights decision McDonald v. Chicago. First, Stevens isn’t backing down from his error-riddled dissent in D.C. v. er, where he asserted that the Second Amendment secures only a collective right to keep and bear arms, not an individual one. Here’s a relevant passage from Stevens’ McDonald dissent:
the Second Amendment differs in kind from the Amendments that surround it, with the consequence that its inclusion in the Bill of Rights is not merely unhelpful but positively harmful to pe ioners’ claim. Generally, the inclusion of a liberty interest in the Bill of Rights points toward the conclusion that it is of fundamental significance and ought to be enforceable against the States. But the Second Amendment plays a peculiar role within the Bill, as announced by its peculiar opening clause. Even acceptLuck_The_Fakers_ing the er Court’s view that the Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms disconnected from militia service, it remains undeniable that “the purpose for which the right was codified” was “to prevent elimination of the militia.”Second, Stevens has endorsed Chicago’s misguided argument that the states should be allowed to “experiment” on the Second Amendment as part of their role as “laboratories of democracy.” Here’s Stevens again:
even apart from the States’ long history of firearms regulation and its location at the core of theirAs a legal authority for this claim, Stevens cites Justice Louis Brandeis’ famous dissent in New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann (1932). The trouble with Brandies' argument—as I’ve previously discussed—is that the Supreme Court would never allow Chicago to "experiment" on the First Amendment, so there’s no legitimate reason why the Second Amendment should receive any less respect. Thankfully, Stevens’ hostility to gun rights is once again the minority view.
police powers, this is a quintessential area in which federalism ought to be allowed to flourish without this Court’s meddling. Whether or not we can assert a plausible cons utional basis for intervening, there are powerful reasons why we should not do so.
winehole, what is up with you sticking "Luck_The_Fakers" in your articles...
"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Cons ution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J.Boyd, Ed., 1950])
"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." (George Mason, 3 Elli0t, Debates at 380)
"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." (Zachariah Johnson, 3 Elli0t, Debates at 646)
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)
Edit: had to fix the Elli0t..
"protect themselves against tyranny in government"
Musket-era Tom never imagined that a gun-loving, killing-loving gun nut would be always underarmed against the "government's" highly militarized SWAT police teams, nevermind a $1T year military.
Obama for 2012!
big deal.Haha, you're a tool. Obama is replacing perhaps the most liberal member of the court, with someone likely to be far less liberal.
"most-liberal" anti-gunner vs "less-liberal" anti-gunner
anti gun-rights is anti gun-rights.
Tell me Bender, would you rather have a Judge who agrees with all your platforms, or just some.
Plus, that judge is the last former military member on the SCOTUS, which bums ne out
how many guns you need?
if the Justices agreed with all my viewpoints, the country would most likely be in huge trouble.
I'm pro-individual rights, including gun rights.
Don't Tread On Me... and all that.
25 or 30. and it's not "need", it's want. I collect them, and have several 100 years old, or almost.how many guns you need?
I'm curious how people who think that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right to "gun up" reconcile the amendment's text with those of other "individual right giving" amendments i.e. The 1st or 6th.
Instead of pissing on us sideways, you could just tell us what you're talking about.
It wouldn't take that much longer.
If you don't like it, change the cons ution. I find it appalling that four members voted against the 2nd amendment.
True, I think his appointments are pretty good considering how far to the left he is. I think they are less extreme than who they are replacing. I say let her be appointed, even with the bad stuff I hear about her because I fear if she is denied, someone even more liberal will get appointed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
