Awesome – Supreme Court Protects Our Guns
Posted by Enrique on 06.26.2008
From my cold, dead hands
"I've saved your ass again, America."
In what can only be described as the single most patriotic moment of jurisprudence in history, the Supreme Court struck down Washington DC's authoritarian gun ban. In a 5-4 decision, the Supremes said that the Constitution protects the right of an individual to keep a loaded gun in his/her home. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia said:
We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution. The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns. But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct. We affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals. Suck it, lefties.
I added that last bit, of course. You can read the entire decision for yourself in PDF format here. It's almost better than porn.
Prepare for your article here to be flamed mercilessly because you expressed that guns aren't the ultimate bane of all existence and that people actually should have the right to own them if they are law abiding citizens.
Posted By: DeimosMasque (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 01:22 PM
I was very happy to hear about this decision. I've always though DC is the shining example of how gun control does not stop crime. I'm looking forward to hearing about all of the follow up lawsuits the NRA is supposedly planning against other states/cities with equivalent draconian laws.
Posted By: cheriks (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 01:42 PM
This is a great day for gun owners. Yet the likes of anti-gun groups will not let us celebrate for long. They are licking their wounds and regrouping.
Everyone has had the right to defense since the beginning of time and it is a right that cannot be infringed.
However D.C. will make it almost impossible to license a handgun and now it will be almost impossible to own a rifle or a shotgun.
This is only the beginning of a long fight to completely secure our rights.
Posted By: Jim (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 02:28 PM
Hey Enrique. I have never clicked on anything you write. Now that I know what a douche bag you are, I'll feel free to never do so again.
Suck it, troll.
I added that last bit.
Posted By: O Hai (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 04:57 PM
Enrique your title made me crack a smile, then I read the little bit you addded to Scalia's decision and I laughed a bit. I will keep an eye out for your articles. Good Job.
Posted By: hmm (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 05:05 PM
I haven't combed through the opinion yet, but the next test will be what constitutional standard applies, rational basis or strict scrutiny. If it's strict scrutiny, there will be a much higher burden for the government to meet to restrict gun rights.
Posted By: Chris Connolly (Registered) on June 26, 2008 at 05:12 PM
I've been reading 411 for many a year, and I've always found generally that most of the writers here show at least a certain level of polish and flair to earn their chops to post their opinions for public consumption.
Not so with you Enrique, I frankly have never read anything from you that I remotely agree with, OR, find well enough reasoned out that I would even consider debating you on your opinions.
I can't understand why 411 continues to gives you your platform, I find the majority of what you post little more than 'trolling' to be honest, certainly not good opinion editorials which might initiate debate or conversations with people who may share opposing or different views. Its kind of like Rush Limbaugh preaching to the converted, who never bother to question what they are hearing, but your audience isn’t one sided (or one dimensional) here.
I fully understand (and support) the idea of providing context and opinions from ‘the right’, but honestly, your opinions (and the way you structure your articles) just seem juvenile, and frankly not worth the time to read.
I’m all for having debate and talking about issues that we may not agree upon, to help find or build consensus, but you just strike me as somebody who’s so bound to their current opinion, that its useless to even engage you in conversation.
Sad, it’s a waste of space in my view, to devote time & space to somebody who can’t initiate debate or conversations, simply parrot a view point that leaves little room for conversation.
I get the sensation you just write to get jollies from seeing your name and opinions up on a web page, and don’t really care that you come off as a ‘right wing nutter’ in the process.
I feel like I can safely ignore WHATEVER you say, given the articles I’ve read from you thus far, and sadly, that defeats the entire purpose of this section in 411, to be exposed to other views, and maybe find that others have points you haven’t considered.
Posted By: Brian in Vancouver (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 05:14 PM
As the leftiest lefty that ever lefted, I have to ask: suck what?
I think this is a good decision. Scalia is still a douche though.
Posted By: Michael O (Registered) on June 26, 2008 at 05:34 PM
This:
"The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns. "
Is why Scalia should suck it, among alot of other reasons. You cannot regulate something that is a RIGHT.
Posted By: BillyBobJoeBob (Guest) on June 26, 2008 at 05:57 PM
That would have been so cool if Scalia actually said suck it lefties.
Anyway, you stole my thunder Enrique. The Court made another good decision because the DC ban went too far.
Posted By: Joe Rivett (Registered) on June 27, 2008 at 12:41 AM
I'm a "leftie" who agrees with this ruling. Enrique, you can suck it. I'm convinced your kid brother has taken over writing these for you and I have clicked your phoned in, ignorant trash for the last time.
Posted By: Shockmaster (Guest) on June 27, 2008 at 02:05 PM
Man, Brian in Vancouver spent so much time typing that crap, that he could have read a few of your contributions, and actually learned how diverse you really are.
Posted By: Pete (Guest) on June 27, 2008 at 03:28 PM
It makes sense that our gun rights were protected. If you take guns away from law abiding citizens, it puts them at risk from criminals who are not going to abide by laws anyways. Liberals don't seem to understand that full gun control will never be possible.
Posted By: Rick (Guest) on June 27, 2008 at 05:09 PM
A troll to people here on 411Mania (i.e. liberals) are anyone that disagrees with the liberal mantras and philosophies. In other words, they want you, Enrique, to not have a column anymore. Why? Disagreement with liberals is considered dangerous. Free speech is overrated to liberals when it comes to conservatives.
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on June 27, 2008 at 05:10 PM
“The ultimate purpose of the Amendment was to protect the States’ share of the divided sovereignty created by the Constitution … [The Amendment] protects only a right to possess and use firearms in connection with service in a state-organized militia.” Justice Stevens
Posted By: Guest#5513 (Guest) on June 30, 2008 at 04:24 AM
STAY CURRENT