WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court held Monday that the Constitution’s Second Amendment restrains government’s ability to significantly limit “the right to keep and bear arms,” advancing a recent trend by the John Roberts-led bench to embrace gun rights. By a narrow, 5-4 vote, the justices also signaled, however, that some limitations on the right could survive legal challenges. Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right “applies equally to the federal government and the states.” The court was split along familiar ideological lines, with five conservative-moderate justices in favor of gun rights and four liberals opposed. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority. Link

Nothing motivates me like a Supreme Court win on gun rights…

The most terrifying thing about this ruling is that it was 5-4. That FOUR United States Supreme Court Justices could possibly disagree that the Second Amendment does not apply to states and cities as well as individuals is unconscionable. It would be like saying the FIRST Amendment didn’t apply to states and cities or to individuals for that matter. Imagine what this liberal line of logic would imply if we were to take their line of (distorted) thought to its logical conclusion: the First Amendment doesn’t guarantee individual free speech rights for example. It is only a “collective” right. Imagine that? No American would tolerate that kind of nonsense. Yet their dissent reflects these disingenuous arguments.

Any more it is as if there are four justices who will dissent on anything the other five affirm no matter what. How they can look at the same law and arrive at completely different opinions is fraudulent on the part of the dissenters. This goes beyond ideology. It is about interpretation of the law. EVERYONE knows that our Founding Fathers put the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights (not buried on some obscure back page) to protect the American people from an abusive dictatorship should we ever find ourselves in that situation. They directly applied their inspired understanding of government and human nature to the Constitution and made sure future generations could defend themselves from any “Redcoats” they should encounter. The four liberal justices need to step aside if they can not in good faith rule on the law as it is written, not as how they wish or think it ought to be. They are intellectual frauds in a position where America can ill afford it.

Our Senators need to remember this during the upcoming confirmations of Elena Kagan. She is already on record showing the same tendencies. That makes her unfit for our highest court.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: