The TC DC Gun Case Post

By Loudoun Insider

What more can I say than has already been said on so many other blogs? I am absolutely ecstatic that the Supreme Court will finally rule that the 2nd Amendment confers an individual right to keep and bear arms. Have at it in comments.


  • Excellent article there, ed. I have to say I am so sick and tired of the usual 5-4 split on every single freaking issue. Do any of these justices have individual opinions? David Souter continues to be one of the single worst legacies of the first George Bush’s presidency. What an absolute dissapointment.

    I tell each and every one of you Republicans who may have a problem with John McCain – get on board strongly and quickly so that the inevitable SCOTUS appointments in the next president’s term are not made by either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. The 5-4 majorities need to be increased in favor of a constitutionalist philosophy, and that’s not going to happen with more Breyer-Stevens-Ginsburg type justices.

  • NOVA_GOPguy says:

    This is one of the few Supreme Court cases I will pay attention to.

  • G. Stone says:

    This is without a doubt the most important case in well over 70 years. However, the brief filed by the Bush Administrations Justice Dept is disappointing and may end up being harmful in the end. It is an absolute embarrassment that this Administration was so disorgananized as to allow such a brief to make its way to the court on such an important decision. How foolish do they look when the Vice President of the United States has to sign onto a brief filed by the congress opposing his own administrations Justice Dept. This is the kind of indecision and lack of commitment on the part of supposed defenders of the second amendment that we can all do without. Thank goodness VP Cheney had the good sense to tell the administration they were wrong.
    Had John Ashcroft still been the AG this would not only be a non-issue, but we would have had a Justice Dept fully on board, bringing the full power of the Executive branch down on the side of Law abiding Citizens.

  • Elder Berry says:

    All I will say is this:

    We have a right to vote, but we also have many detailed rules and regulations about how it shall be done. Do these rules “limit our right” to vote?

    Simplistic and knee-jerk reactions to the complex issue of guns and gun control, like the equally complex and important abortion issue, do not help us keep the Constitution a living document in our modern times.

  • not amused says:


    Elder Berry – yes, we have the right to vote, but 1) there is no fee paid when you register to vote, and 2) voter registration is “shall-issue” if you meet the criteria (live in the district, US citizen, non-felon, etc.). These rules don’t limit our right to vote, but they do help prevent vote fraud.

    I think Ginsberg will break from her liberal peers and vote with the majority. Not many people know it, but she used to be a competition shooter.

  • NoVA Scout says:

    G.Stone: are you sure it isn’t Mr. Chaney who looked foolish?

  • 10 feet tall and Bulletproof says:

    “Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense?” Patrick Henry

  • Former Candidate says:

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    Simple enough?

  • G. Stone says:

    Elder Berry:

    It is not a living document. That interpretation IS the problem. The second amendment is no more complex than the first amendment, or any other amendment in this amazingly simple to follow document. The moment that we start believing like you, that these issues and that document are so complex that it is beyond the comprehension of regular folk , we are screwed. The attempted convolution of issues is but one method of those wishing to expand their power base, enlarge their sphere of influence or garner as much control as
    possible . All in the name of guiding those unable to comprehend the nuianced world around us. (Senator Kerry call your office) Their elevated intellect cuts through the complexity of life, crafts public policy and is all that stands in the way of us harming ourselves on a daily basis.

    For those who believe like you, I suggest a weekend reading the Federalist Papers as well as the Constitution. After that, if your still inclined to believe in the nanny state, then so be it. The Obama campaign can use you.

    Nova: Absolutely, just because he shot one of his friends is no reason to rag on Dick. I thought I would bring it up before one of you gun hating constitutional scholars beat me to it. Or did you already ?

    10 footer: Be careful, Patrick Henry, James Madison and others of their ilk would be considered ” Wingnuts ” by many around here.

  • Stone, Henry and Madison would defintely not fall in the wingnut category.

    “just because he shot one of his friends” is unintentionally (or maybe intentionally) hilarious!

    I am not a fan of Cheney at all, but he did get it right on the gun issue, even though his own gun control isn’t so great.

  • Elder Berry says:

    I speak as someone who has had a criminal hold a gun to my face. My having a gun would not have helped. The guy beside me who reached into his pocket almost got both of us shot.

    I believe in the right to bear arms. However, I believe that we have too little gun education and we need comprehensive licensing and improved technology.

    The Constitution is a living document. It can be amended if it fails to keep pace with the times. It has been so amended before. I think that if gun rights advocates like the NRA keep being out of touch with changing sentiment about guns in large parts of the populace, in the face of these repeated gun tragedies, they will actually pave the way for an overwhelming demand for an amendment, and then where will you be.

  • 10 feet tall and Bulletproof says:

    Madison was a democrat. Look into your history, G.

  • 10 feet tall and Bulletproof says:

    Elder Berry, unfortunately, you are going down the losing fork in the road again. Was the gun that was held in your face licensed or registered? Probably not. (and I used to get paid to have guns put in my face as opposed to someone under my watch, many , many years ago)
    I’m all for training, however. It’s what kept me from walking into a situation that actually put a gun in my face where I didn’t already have the drop on the feces holding that gun. In my scenarios, there were definitely going to be two of us laying there when the authorities got there.

  • G. Stone says:

    10 footer:
    So was Jefferson and I dig em both.


    I was shooting for a play on Dick Cheney and Gun Control or lack thereof. You nailed it.

    This is becoming a Pun intended double entendre.

  • G. Stone says:

    Elder berry:

    The process of amending the constitution is part of the original document and has never changed from day one. That process is also very diffecult as it should be in order keep it from being used as a tool for political whims.

    The further restriction of my Gun rights would not have benefited you in any way in your encounter with the bad guy. I have no way of knowing whether a gun would have helped you or not. I actually don’t care. I respect the fact that you and others choose not to arm yourselves. I in no way advocate laws or public policies that require you to be armed. I only wish those who choose not to arm themselves for whatever reason would not champion laws or policy that retard my ability to protect myself or engage in otherwise lawful use of firearms. It is a two way street.

    As for the Gun Tragedies. Gun control is actually part of the problem. Gun free Zones is a feel good policy that can only lead to diaster. These Zones are areas where bad guys can operate with impunity until law enforcement arrives. They get to shot fish in a barrel until someone with a gun arrives. If the fish have guns and shoot back, the dynamics of the game change.
    Another aspect of this never covered in the media is most criminals, thugs and wannabes are for the most part are undiciplined and untrained nit wits. These are people who are as brave as long as the opposition is an unarmed co-ed or clerks at the mall. Insert a licensed civilian gun owner, off duty cop, trained security professional or former member of the military and these nitwits usually fold like a cheap lawn chair. Guns in the hands of the good guys is a good thing. The more good guys with a gun the better chances society at large has at protecting itself from those who believe it their right to decide the time and place of our passing.

  • I think most people think folks should have the right to have guns. The problem is the “gun” definition in my view.

    If everyone had a musket, I would feel safer.

  • 10 feet tall and Bulletproof says:

    G… tell him about the town in Georgia where every resident owned guns. The crime rate was …. ZERO. Seems when faced with the fact that if assailants were actually going to run into armed homeowners in EVERY house in town, they elected to move on to more fertile (and gun free) homes elsewhere.
    We’ve had three homes burglarized out here recently…and I elected to pack two more magazines and place them under the pillow.
    (no…I don’t actually load the weapon until I’m ready to violate someone with enough balls to cross my threshold)

  • G. Stone says:

    10 Footer:

    We have mountains of statistics to back up our contention that an armed society is a polite society. Those states ( 40 or 44 as of 2007 ) and political jurisdictions allowing shall issue permits to its citizens are safer than those that do not or have restrictive gun control laws in place. DC would be a prime example.

    Those who disagree should put a sign in their front yard proclaiming their house a Gun Free Zone. If the concept of Gun Free Zones works then why not ?

    Even those who reside in shall issue states yet reject gun ownership are the beneficiaries of those policies whether they like it or not. I suspect they do , they just can’t admit it for fear of being labeled a hypocrite.

  • So what is the town in Georgia? I would like to know.

  • 10 feet tall and Bulletproof says:

    Advertising a “Gun Free Zone” on the curb??? I laughed so hard I almost fell outta my chair. Because we both know that those who want a lot less resistance in the commission of their crime would be glad to come on in and help themselves.

    Edmund, it became known as “GunTown”, USA, since the Washington Post attempted a smear job using that title.
    But it’s actually Kennesaw, Ga.

Leave Comment