Thursday, June 26, 2008

Reactions to the Decision from the Usual Suspects

MSNBC has posted several reactions to the recent Heller Decision – I thought I’d include them here with some commentary.

"This opinion should usher in a new era in which the constitutionality of government regulations of firearms are reviewed against the backdrop of this important right."
- Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.

Leahy has a fairly mixed record on 2nd Amendment issues, but at least he seems to be coming out in support of the decision here.

"The right to bear arms is a fundamental right we enjoy as citizens of the United States. From individuals being able to protect their family and their home to sportsmen venturing into the outdoors, this is an important and historic day for all citizens of this great country."
- Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn.

Well said!

"I am profoundly disappointed in Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, both of whom assured us of their respect for precedent. With this decision, 70 years of precedent has gone out the window. And I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it."
- Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

Sorry Dianne, the people aren’t buying your “gun control = safety” mantra anymore. Time and time again it has been shown that the areas with the most ardently anti-Second Amendment laws are the ones with the greatest degree of violence.

"Today's ruling is a major victory for the rights of all Americans to protect themselves and their families. The Supreme Court sent a clear message to local, state, and federal governments that this individual right cannot be unreasonably infringed."
- Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas

Also well said!

"I think this is a long overdue decision; I don't think the precedent has been seriously reaffirmed in decades."
- Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis.

Actually the 2nd Amendment has never been affirmed by the Supreme Court. Of course, until the 20th Century, everyone understood the 2nd Amendment just fine and the Court didn’t have to say that when the 2nd Amendment says “the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” it means “the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.

"The nation's top court made the correct decision by reaffirming one of our founding principles, the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. This historic ruling has implications far beyond the District of Columbia."
- Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas

No argument there!

"Today, President Bush's radical Supreme Court justices put rigid ideology ahead of the safety of communities in New Jersey and across the country. This decision illustrates why I have strongly opposed extremist judicial nominees and will continue to do so in the future."
- Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.

Ahhh – so standing up for the Bill of Rights is an “extremist” “rigid ideology”. If so, then call me extremist.

"In the most significant victory for the Second Amendment in recent memory, the Supreme Court today reaffirmed our citizens' constitutional right to keep and bear arms...This decision should send a clear message to opponents of the Second Amendment. The Constitution plainly guarantees the solemn right to keep and bear arms, and the whims of politically correct bureaucrats cannot take it away."
- House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio

Nicely said!

"The Supreme Court's decision underscores our country's commitment to protecting the fundamental rights on which America was founded. Today, America has reaffirmed its promise to the right to bear arms."
- Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Texas

I notice a lot of people on the Democratic side of the aisle coming out in favor of this ruling, and understanding the nuances of the Bill of Rights (note Rep. Lampson says “reaffirmed”, no mention of the Constitution “granting” rights). Why the heck did the party nominate such an anti-Second Amendment candidate for president then?

"While this is a clear victory for those who live in Washington, D.C., it's my hope what was decided here today projects a powerful new precedent for judges to follow across the country."
- Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo.

A-men to that, can’t wait to see the next ban struck down!

"Today's ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country."
- Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

Awhattahuh? Nice way to say something without saying anything. He just stated the facts. He didn’t say whether he agreed with the ruling, disagreed with the ruling, or would appoint justices that would overturn the ruling. And Obama is supposed to represent a “change” from the Washington establishment? He just spent several words saying NOTHING. From where I sit, that’s stereotypical politician...

"This ruling does not mark the end of our struggle against those who seek to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. We must always remain vigilant in defense of our freedoms."
- Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Now THAT’S an unambiguous stand on the issue, one I agree with heartily, and one I expected from McCain who has been the subject of previous blogs.

"Eighty people a day die at the hands of guns. We have got to stop that. The court clearly ruled that reasonable regulations are permitted under that decision."
- New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg

Yeah, but their definition of the word “reasonable” and your definition of the word “reasonable” are two different things. I agree, too many people are killed daily in the US. Do something about GANGS and CRIME, and quit attacking the basic rights and liberties of American citizens.

Not a heck of a lot of surprises there – anywhere really. The rabidly anti-Second Amendment politicians remain so. Those who support our rights continue to do so. Obama, as always, speaks a lot of words and says nothing.

Much more to come on this one!!! Watch this spot!

No comments: