Comments on: Targeting The Supreme Court

How A Libertarian Who's Never Owned A Gun Brought The Decisive Case On The Second Amendment

[mrman321]

hey ya''ll. mista BIG EARS man is in da HOUSE babay!!!

[taotxzen]

I''ll Trade You the 2nd Amendment for the 4th

Cenk Uygur Fri Jun 27, 12:22 PM ET

Conservatives are thrilled about the Supreme Court decision settling the 2nd amendment issue in favor of individual gun owners (versus the idea that gun rights are only within the framework of a well-regulated militia). They are celebrating the constitution today. God bless their hearts. I wish they did that more often and about more amendments.

I believe in gun control. I believe that guns do kill people. In fact, they are designed to kill things. It is indisputable that they make killing a lot easier. That''s what they''re made for.

But I believe my side has lost this issue for now in the court of public opinion and in the Supreme Court. There are actually two different issues here. One is the policy argument concerning how much gun control we should have. The other is the constitutional argument of what the second amendment means.

(cont)

[taotxzen]

(cont)

I think it is reasonable to disagree on the meaning of the second amendment. In fact, I''m torn on it. If I heard this case myself as a judge and ultimately came down against the majority decision (which is not a certainty at all, I think this presents an excellent and close constitutional question -- apparently the Supreme Court agreed since they split 5-4 on it), I still wouldn''t find the majority position unreasonable.

So, I am happy to concede that we should follow the second amendment to the letter of the law (as interpreted in this case). Now, can conservatives find it in their heart to agree that we should also follow the fourth amendment to the letter of the law? And if they can''t, what possible logical or constitutional arguments can they have for fervently defending one amendment and rejecting another?

he fourth amendment clearly states that the government needs a warrant with probable cause in order for it to conduct a search or seizure. The Bush administration has been in flagrant violation of this for seven years now. They refuse to get warrants to wiretap conversations of Americans speaking with or emailing people abroad. This is clearly illegal and unconstitutional. But here conservatives find the constitution a little more inconvenient.

(cont)

[taotxzen]

(cont)


Justice Scalia warned after the recent Guantanamo Bay case, that the majority had almost certainly caused the deaths of many Americans with their decision. I think that''s absurd hyperbole. But what is entirely possible is that the second amendment decision written by Scalia will lead to many more American deaths. But I don''t begrudge him that. If he thinks that''s the correct interpretation of the amendment, then our only recourse is to pass another amendment overriding it (not going to happen). We''ll have to live with the extra deaths. Freedom isn''t free.

But here, I propose a very fair trade. I will trade the second amendment for the fourth amendment. If the Bush administration releases the fourth amendment that it is currently holding hostage, I''m happy to consider the Supreme Court decision on the second amendment final and decisive. You keep the second amendment, we keep the fourth.

That seems like the fairest possible trade. My guess is that conservatives won''t bite. They will continue the party line about how crucial it is that we follow the constitution when it comes to the second amendme

[nabusdriver1]

Nancy, I understand freedom of speech but you have forgotten about the freedom to bare arms. I am a 39 year old woman who grew up with a true fear of guns brought about but my father, but I married a hunter and sportsmen who taught me a true respect for guns and hunting. For many of us it is not about looking cool, it''s about spending time with friends who have the same attitude we do. I have hunted for 20 years now. AND YES I do buy most of my meat at the supermarket. But to spend a day outside with nature, quiet, relaxed, weather I actually kill and animal or not, is an experience of it''s own. I hunt with a camera as much as I hunt with a gun. But the right that all americans have to bare arms is that A RIGHT!!! Guns don''t kill, people kill. I know you have heard that a million times but it is true. There are millions of us, men, women, and yes kids, who have a love for the outdoors and our families who have hunted for generations will not stand by and let that right be taken away from us. Maybe you need to talk about the need for ratial harmony, more money for police around the nation, a stricter up bringing, about parent who care enough to raise their children with the ability to know the EXACT difference between right and wrong. I do and I still love my guns.

[realpatriot1]

babykilller,

You are absolutely 100% correct! Conservatives cherry-pick the Constitution in the same manner that they do with national intrelligence and the Bible.

That said, this case is of much less consequence than many on both sides think. I''m not an expert and I''m still learning about this ruling but it seems clear that people still don''t have the right to roam the streets packing handguns.

The real public safety issue is concealability. Someone protecting their home is just as safe with a shotgun as with a Derringer. A criminal on the other hand needs to conceal their weapon to avoid detection.

[kevboom]

Well, Levy better hope someone doesn''t use some of those un-banned handguns to play target practice with his ears, because they won''t miss!

[minnick8-2009]

People who advocate that private gun ownership should be banned are saying they want a society where only the police, military, CIA, FBI, Secret Service and Criminals can carry weapons. That is not the socity I want. It sounds a lot like Communism to me.

I grew up in an isolated area of the country and back in the 1950''s and early 1960''s our family depended on the annual hunt for sustenance. I know people who still depend on it. Farmers and ranchers carry their weapons to protect their herds from wild animals. The major mode of transportation in Alaska is private plane. One native Alaskan told me that you don''t fly in a plane in Alaska without taking your rifle. If the plane goes down and no one has a weapon, potentials survivors have much less chance of surviving.

I don''t own any weapons, but I sure like it that I could if I wanted.

[mdjansen]

Cohen and the historian in his ivory tower feel our Constitutional framers were "addled" and just like today''s politicians. What an insult to those who risked their lives, families, and personal fortunes to found this country.

Based on these commentators'' twisted statements, then we should also do away with a free press and free speech. Imagine what that would do to CBS and higher education.

[gkc99]

""Why don''t we do away with the court system?" Daley said. "The old West - you have a gun and I have a gun and we''ll settle on the street." "

The Daley''s, the city of Chicago, and the state of Illinois in essense have done away with the court system--the honest court system, that is.

A culture of corruption, influence, and police brutality pervade Chicago and its parent state, and Daley''s own father went a long way to produce that evil culture with his use of the cops as his private goon squad in the 1968 Democratic Convention.

Ex-Gov. Jim Thompson made the implicit admission that the Illinois criminal justice system is so biased, corrupt, and loaded with influence peddling that in a moment of conscience he realized he couldn''t send men convicted under that system to their deaths.

But the Daley''s don''t seem to ever have had any pangs of conscience over the crooked empire they created.

If there ever was a populace in need of personal self-defense in the history of the USA, the people of Chicago would have to be numbered among them.

Another populace historically denied self-defense is the Black population--Jim Crow laws and crooked police and judicial systems having systematically denied them justice when it was only an "n-word killing", or a Black man was accused of harming a White person.

The right to self-defense is the first right, because all other rights are subordinate to the right of survival.

[ronnm2]

This was one of the most lopsided stories you folks have had in a while! Once more the attitude of "we are better than you, there for we know better than you" came through with a resounding blare. If you were to research the killings in the US by guns, you would find mostly gang involvement. How do you keep the guns out of there hands? Make a law to make it illegal for gangs to have guns? So, how would you stop it or enforce it? you want the criminals to have weapons, but the average citizen to be held hostage. let''s face it, any one, regardless of the laws can get a gun if they want one. So, the bottom line is; the 2nd amendment was put in place to allow citizens to protect themselves from the government if necessary. The forefathers weren''t stupid people as you would have us believe.

[martin9p2]

DC''s handgun ban was a practical solution to a modern problem. Given that the Second Amendment is vague, why do we have to hash it over and over and over, as if it were god-given? Practicality has shown that hand guns are a menace, so we SHOULD be able to limit hand guns and let the good people of DC defend themselves with larger, less concealable weapons.

[fuzzybear9]

Hello America

Today I should Like to take up the Topic of
Apartide.

what with the recent Mandella party, of all places in London, where he continues to hide.

now for our younger readers that know little of the topic, let me refresh you with history,

about oh say 30 years ago there was a movement among
the Liberal Black Caccus under the direction of Ted Kennedy, to spread on colledge campuses, the Liberal idea of Apartied. with pop singers such as Simon, Elton, etc. etc.

so Hawvard, Stanford, UC Berkley, Browns, Montana State and countless other Universities began the International, embargo against South Africa,
settled by White mainly Dutch immigrants in the 1850`s.

now South Africa had became prosperous with diamonds, gold, wheat and cattle. for nearly say 150 years.

After the White South Africans Fled to Australia and else where to avoid the unrest of Apartied flaming tires and whatnot, then came Nelson Mandella out of prison to run South Africa.

now 30 years later, Zimbabwee instead of being a country of vast resources, is now led under Mob rule from Apartied, starvation, anarchy. and Darfor and so on and so forth.

Fuzzy were is this going ?
I only wanted to show the results of Liberal Medalling after a period of time,
and to remind those Socialist Liberals of Hawvard and Stanford, how much pain and suffering their stupid ideas have had on Humanity, every time you see a starving black South African Baby.
sincerely Fuzzy Bear

[thoughtful99]

If I had been allowed to carry a gun, 2 muggers would have been dead, rather than surviving to murder a number of innocents.
In at least one town that encouraged women to carry guns, the rape dropped in a ratio of about 10::1.
Check the actual statistics &/or read, "More Guns, Less Crime."
A pool is riskier than a gun in the house.For those who are still doubtful,a maniac who shot a number of innocents was described as stopping because he was "convinced" to stop, but the news reports tended to omit the fact that the convincing was done at the point of a gun held by a private citizen. Otherwise, the murder spree would have continued.

[cfin5]

Just because he doesn''t own a gun doesn''t mean he doesn''t own his 2nd. Amendment RIGHTS. That is what he fought for and won. The question about people dying because of this defense of the Constitution is answered in part, but not wholly in clarity. The answer is that more CRIMINALS will die instead of innocent victims. Don''t think I''ll be losing much sleep over worrying for burglars wanting to commit "SUICIDE BY HOMEOWNER",.....I''ll let "them" worry about that!

[mdjansen]

1. Gun crime is up in Washington D.C. since the gun ban
2. Criminals go where the citizens are defenseless
3. Dictatorships first remove arms from their people
4. Oh, it is the Second Amendment to our Constitution. Have you read our Constitution? Do you realize it is the law of the land?

Why do your commentators now question the competence of the framers of our Constitution and the Second Amendment? I could not believe I heard that. Do such elitists think we should just throw out the Constitution?

Levy "played" the system? "''Targeting'' the Supreme Court"? Again, it is the Second Amendment. It is not political, as you are trying to do with our Constitution.

I never have owned a gun and hope I never need to own one. But if we outlaw guns, I may need to get one.