By David Hogberg
For a moment, I thought that this editorial criticizing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia's ruling against the Washington, D.C. handgun ban appeared in the New York Times. One expects that sort of hysteria from Pinch's rag. But the Washington Post editorial page, while liberal, is usually, well, reasonable. This led me to two possible conclusions.
Very interesting summary of the state of leftist denial. If the law, statistics, history and the Constitution do not support ones position, appeal to emotion, use hyperbole, and make up figures, while rewriting all those nasty details.
The enviros have been using the David Brower 4-point assault for about 50 years now - with an alarming success rate. We see the same tactics used in a frenzied assault on the 2nd Amendment:
1) Use sweeping generalities with little or no supporting data;
2) Appeal to emotion, not reason;
3) Use carefully selected quotations out of context & offer highly specialized interpretations of those twisted quotes;
Court Rediscovers 2nd Amendment, Liberals Fear Other 'Rights' May Soon be Found
by Mac Johnson (More by this author)
Tragedy struck leftists all across America last week when a federal appeals court reviewing the District of Columbiaâ€™s handgun ban, ruled that the right of the people to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed upon by the District. The court's inexplicable ruling was based on a "radical" interpretation of the recently rediscovered 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reads:
[b]The Right to Bear Arms in Washington D.C.[/b]
By George Will
Sunday, March 18, 2007
WASHINGTON -- By striking down the District of Columbia's extraordinarily strict gun control law, which essentially bans guns, a federal appeals court may have revived gun control as a political issue. It has been mostly dormant since autumn 2000, when Al Gore decided he was less interested in it than in carrying states such as Michigan and Pennsylvania: "Gore Tables Gun Issue As He Courts Midwest" (The New York Times, Sept. 20, 2000).
We need to modify the US constitution to make it more clearer for Liberal activist judges. I think Maine's constitution does a decent job
Section 16. To keep and bear arms.
Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned.
[quote="bonger"]We need to modify the US constitution to make it more clearer for Liberal activist judges. I think Maine's constitution does a decent job
Section 16. To keep and bear arms.
Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned.[/quote]
Apparently, we need to remind a lot of people about this amendment. Right now, it seems to read "...shall never be questioned, except by over-zealous local cops, paranoid store owners, granola-crunching commies from Massachusettts, City-minded elitists, and anyone else who doesn't like people carrying guns." Honestly, walk into any store in Maine with a pistol on your side in plain sight. 9 times out of 10 the store owner will ask you to leave, and the 10th time they will ask to see your carry permit.
[size=18]Equal rights under the Second Amendment[/size]
By Ken Blackwell
Thursday, March 29, 2007
On March 9, a good thing happened for people living in the central and inner cities of America: the DC gun ban was declared unconstitutional. The blanket ban on all operational firearms - and every handgun even if that gun doesn't work - was struck down as unconstitutional by a federal appeals court. As a guy who lived in the projects, served as mayor of Cincinnati, and who serves as a member of the National Rifle Association's urban affairs committee,