Discuss "Two courts, one sin"

The column is ridiculous. The difference between the activists and Heller is Obvious. Scalia made a finding based on what he thought the framers were trying to do with the second amendment. Blackmun simply "decided" that abortion was part of "liberty" protected by the 14th amenement with no consideration of the intent of the framers. You can argue about whether or not it is a good idea to try and determine original intent, but Heller is originalist, and Roe and Miranda aren't.

ShelbyC @ 4:17 PM PDT, Oct 23, 2008

Dear David, unfortunately I do 'get it'. Let me clarify for you: I believe the founders' intent with the 2nd Amendment was to provide for national defense, there being no standing army at the time. However, I imagine making gun ownership illegal at this point and trying to collect the guns would take a very, very long time and would leave the criminals as the sole individual possessors of firearms, there being countless millions of guns floating around out there. It's a conundrum. But I appreciate a good bit of sarcasm as much as the next guy, so keep up the good work.

Hunter @ 2:47 PM PDT, Oct 23, 2008

You only need to go as far back as Scalia's response to Bourdemiene to relieve any illusions about Scalia's "judicial restraint."

Doug @ 6:33 AM PDT, Oct 23, 2008

All dictators (Stalin, Hitler, take your pick) eliminate personal defense rights prior to taking control. If we don't stand it's only a matter of time before it happens here.

Stephen @ 6:16 AM PDT, Oct 23, 2008

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" In the COTUS, sovereign citizens restrict the authority of the federal government-created for their convenience: specifically defining the limits, and balance, of powers required to support citizen self-rule. Federal officers must swear to "preserve, protect and defend the [COTUS]"- not to "keep the it 'elastic' or 'interpret it in light of contemporary standards". Federal government has no authority to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Anyone not understanding these simple terms has no business sitting in judgment.

Frank D. Banta @ 4:56 AM PDT, Oct 23, 2008

The only reason there is a claim for an individual right to be privately armed for self-defense is that the gun lobby led by the NRA works very hard and very successfully to defeat any laws that would apply against the lawless because the same laws would apply against the NRA's "armed citizen guerrillas" http://www.potowmack.org/emerappd.html#ak47 and others with insurrectionist fantasies. The militia was an instrument of government. Militia duty was conscript duty to suppress insurrections. Privately owned weapons were placed on inventories for militia call up. http://www.potowmack.org/milret.html

GEErnst @ 4:49 AM PDT, Oct 23, 2008

Gun control works only on law abiding citizens, leaving them unable to effectively defend themselves against predatory criminals who have decided to have guns despite the best intentions of those would would lobby for more gun controls. Just in case, I am going to post this and go sharpen my hunting knife, and failing that I have my childhood baseball bat near the door!

David @ 1:19 AM PDT, Oct 23, 2008

Continued... Is "Hunter" telling us in his own dirty little liberal words that it is impossible to prevent crooks from having guns with ordinary gun control? Perhaps this is the beginning of the more effective education of poor "Hunter". Perhaps there is hope after all. Even if he doesn't get it, "Hunter" has very eloquently said it.

David @ 1:19 AM PDT, Oct 23, 2008

Let's evaluate "Hunter's" comments back in #2... "But unfortunately the genie is so long out of the bottle that it would take generations to do the job..." The "Job" being his aforementioned "...round all the guns up..." He then continues with, "...and in the meantime crooks would still have guns." What??? I am confused.

David @ 1:17 AM PDT, Oct 23, 2008

Scalia an activist Justice? Your kidding, right? No way! I thought only liberals were activists, and Scalia gets to pat himself on the back and call himself a texturalist.

BRT @ 11:39 PM PDT, Oct 22, 2008

Next