Supreme Court rules that 2nd Ammendment protects individual gun-ownership!!

Z

Zarathustra

#1
Cheers, fears meet Supreme Court gun ruling




The taxidermist, the architect, the mother who lost two children to violence -- they all see the Supreme Court decision differently.
By Miguel Bustillo and Louise Roug, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers

HOUSTON -- Ben Cromeens has 17 guns at home, 13 that he bought and another four he inherited from his dad. He keeps two stashed in a secret compartment near his bed, just in case anyone thinks of messing with his family.

To the 32-year-old son of Central Texas cattle ranchers, Thursday's Supreme Court ruling that individuals have a constitutional right to carry firearms for self-defense seemed about as obvious as the sun. But, Cromeens said, he travels and knows that not all Americans agree.



"The way I look at it, it's the right that ensures all others," he said outside his taxidermy shop -- which was stuffed with turkeys, wart hogs and other trophies that Houston hunters paid him to preserve. "You can't have freedom of speech and freedom of the press if you're unsafe."

Cheers, fears meet Supreme Court gun ruling - Los Angeles Times








Finally, The Supreme Court got something right...
 
D

Defensor

#4
What do you mean by that? Won't this decision oblige the feds to rescind all it's anti-gun laws?
For now. But as long as this worship of the 'final ruling' of the black robes continues, a reversal of fortune is only one individual's opinion away.
 
Z

Zarathustra

#5
For now. But as long as this worship of the 'final ruling' of the black robes continues, a reversal of fortune is only one individual's opinion away.

Well that's true to an extent, but at least it'll be like this for a while. Look at how long it's been since they've ruled that abortion should be legal everywhere.

I figure we've got at least a couple decades, which ain't bad.
 
D

Defensor

#6
Thomas DiLorenzo put it best over at LewRockwell.com:

Today's Supreme Court decision that we have individual rights to arm ourselves highlights more than any other recent decision the absurdity of allowing the federal government, through its courts, to determine the limits of its own powers. This came about in the post-1865 era, once states' rights/federalism was destroyed. (Yes, judicial review existed for a long time before that, but presidents, state legislatures, and citizens viewed it as merely the Supreme Court's opinion, not THE FINAL WORD, ONCE AND FOR ALL on constitutional issues).

The shocking thing about today's decision is that if one man -- Anthony Kennedy -- voted the other way, then what -- we would all be forcefully disarmed?

A judicial dictatorship is what nationalists like Alexander Hamilton and his disciple, Justice John Marshall, wanted, and that of course is what we've ended up with. But imagine if the Court declared in 1805 that Americans do not have individual rights to own firearms. Do you think the Jeffersonians would have given up their firearms and genuflected to the black-robed deities of the Court? Hell no; they would have reached for them and commenced another revolution.
 
Z

Zarathustra

#7
The point of the SC is to detirmine what powers of the gov't are allowed and what aren't, what are you talking about?
 
D

Defensor

#8
The point of the SC is to detirmine what powers of the gov't are allowed and what aren't, what are you talking about?
The point of the federal government is to determine what powers of the federal government are allowed? A bit of a conflict of interests there, dontcha think?
 
Z

Zarathustra

#9
The point of the federal government is to determine what powers of the federal government are allowed? A bit of a conflict of interests there, dontcha think?
On paper I suppose, but it actually is quite effective in practice. It isn't perfect, but we are better off with it than without it.

I'd rather have a scholar who has been examing the constitution all his life and doesnt need to worry about reelection than leave it up to some two-bit politician who is trying to buy votes.