The Battle Continues for 2nd Amendment

Maynard at the Tammy Bruce Blog posted this a while back:

How the Left Plans to Take Your Guns

While dining out, he overhears a foghorn leftist justifying to her friend the confiscation of all guns from citizens. Among other things this woman claimed that collective rights usurp our individual rights. It has a kind of logic, yet Maynard points out how it's not even consistently applied:

[...] It's also worth noting the irony of how Leftists will interpret the Constitution very loosely when they want to invent a new "right", but they turn into super-strict constructionists when trying to control people they dislike. For example, where exactly do you find your Constitutional right to unrestricted access to abortions? Even those who favor a woman's right to choose (as I do) must acknowledge that the Constitutional argument is marginal. It's said to derive from the right to privacy, which also isn't enumerated, but is a generous interpretation of protection from unreasonable search and seizure (the Fourth Amendment). I heard Gloria Allred expalin that abortion rights were a product of the "Constitutional penumbra". I won't necessarily argue with that, but can't we have a little consistency here? Someone who finds meaning in the Constitution's penumbra ought to also respect the actual words. [...]

This is a popular tactic with the left, and the views Maynard overheard are worth noting since they are actively being used against all gun owning citizens to dilute the meaning and authority of the 2nd Amendment. It's worth reading the whole thing.


More recently, Maynard posted this:

The Second Amendment: Saved?

[...] In a 2-1 decision, a U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia has overturned the DC gun ban. The court ruled that the right to bear arms is "not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued intermittent enrollment in the militia."

In other words, in the opinion of this Court, the Second Amendment acknowledges YOUR right to be armed. You may think this is obvious and that any other opinion would have been a gross offence against common sense and decency. But, legally speaking, the question had been undecided.

This ruling does NOT end the issue. This is a regional court ruling. Only a Supreme Court ruling would settle the legal argument for the nation. [...]

Saved? No. It's a step in the right direction, but a future Supreme Court decision against gun owners could still be disastrous.





Related Links:

www.saveourguns.com

Second Amendment victory in D.C.

Crime Emergency in "Gun Free" Washington, DC