Obama Declares War on Gunowners!

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • longrange

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 2, 2009
    56
    6
    south bend
    I came across this on msn today at work. I think its crap and we would have a revolution. You can take the guns off the streets but the thugs and low lifes will remain.

    KEN BLACKWELL: Obama Declares War on America’s Gun Owners With Supreme Court Pick


    By Ken Blackwell
    Senior Fellow, American Civil Rights Union/Family Research Council

    President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor is a declaration of war against America’s gun owners and the Second Amendment to our Constitution. If gun owners mobilize and unite, it’s possible (though unlikely) to stop this radical nominee.
    —————
    According to Judge Sotomayor, if your state or city bans all guns the way Washington, D.C. did, that’s okay under the Constitution.
    —————
    Last year the Supreme Court handed down the landmark decision in D.C. v. Heller, holding that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applies to individual citizens in their private lives. The ruling marked a turning point in gun rights in this country.
    In the past year, the biggest question courts now face is whether the Second Amendment applies to the states. That may sound crazy, but the reality is that the Bill of Rights only controls the federal government, it doesn’t apply directly to states or cities. Only the parts of the Bill of Rights that are “incorporated” through the Fourteenth Amendment apply to the states.
    Since the Heller decision, only two federal appeals courts have written on the Second Amendment. That’s six judges out of about 170. Of those six, three said the Second Amendment does apply to the states. And those judges were out of the liberal Ninth Circuit in California, and included a judge appointed by Bill Clinton and another appointed by Jimmy Carter. — Even leftist judges can get this.
    But not Judge Sonia Sotomayor. She is one of only three federal appellate judges in America to issue a court opinion saying that the Second Amendment does not apply to states. The case was Maloney v. Cuomo, and it came down this past January.
    That means if Chicago, or even the state of Illinois or New York, wants to ban you from owning any guns at all, even in your own house, that’s okay with her. According to Judge Sotomayor, if your state or city bans all guns the way Washington, D.C. did, that’s okay under the Constitution.
    This issue could not be more important. Today, on the very day President Obama has announced Judge Sotomayor’s nomination, the National Rifle Association is arguing Second Amendment incorporation in court before the Seventh Circuit in a case challenging the Chicago ban on handguns.
    If this case, or one like it, goes to the Supreme Court, Justice Sotomayor would say that Chicago can ban all your guns. If she can persuade her liberal colleagues on the Court to join her, it could become the law of the land that states and cities can ban guns. Should that happen, then you can expect anti-gun liberals in state legislatures to rush to pass new state laws doing exactly that.
    The White House is telling us all about Judge Sotomayor’s compelling personal story — and it is an amazing story of what is possible “only in America.” But compelling personal stories are not the question. Miguel Estrada, whom President George W. Bush nominated to the D.C. Circuit appeals court and was planning on nominating to the Supreme Court, had a compelling story as a Hispanic immigrant who legally came to this country not even speaking English. Democrats filibustered Mr. Estrada.
    Supporters point out that Judge Sotomayor was first appointed by George H.W. Bush for the federal trial court — before Bill Clinton elevated her to the Second Circuit appeals court. That’s true, but George H.W. Bush also gave us Justice David Souter, so clearly he wasn’t too careful about putting liberals on the federal bench. We can’t allow the left to hide behind the Bushes.
    But when it comes to gun rights, we don’t need to guess. Judge Sotomayor has put in writing what she thinks. President Obama has nominated a radically anti-Second Amendment judge to be our newest Supreme Court justice.
    There are a number of pro-Second Amendment Democratic senators from deeply red states, including Mark Begich from Alaska, Jon Tester and Max Baucus from Montana, Ben Nelson from Nebraska, Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad from North Dakota, and Tim Johnson from South Dakota.
    These senators will jeopardize their seats if they vote to support an anti-gun radical for the Supreme Court. Second Amendment supporters will now be up in arms over this radical anti-Second Amendment nominee, and you should never underestimate the political power of American gun owners.
     

    standeford

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 10, 2009
    196
    16
    Indianapolis
    Hardly

    Sotomayor would replace Souter, who dissented in Heller, so it isn't like this would result in a shift in the court's opinion of 2nd Amendment issues.
     

    redneckmedic

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    8,429
    48
    Greenfield
    molan labe


    m_b4ea380d48a44bdaa919457022763ec9.jpg
     

    rhino

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    30,906
    113
    Indiana
    Sotomayor will be bad in almost every conceivable way. Aside from her deliberate intellectual dishonesty with respect to the 2nd Amendment and the individual right to keep and bear arms, she's also going to continue with pro-abortion judicial activism/defacto legislation at each and every opportunity that arises before her.

    She is a dishonest, dishonorable, bad person.
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    Hardly

    Sotomayor would replace Souter, who dissented in Heller, so it isn't like this would result in a shift in the court's opinion of 2nd Amendment issues.

    Don't discount this problem so fast. The only reason Heller went our way even the bit that it did is that "weather-vane" Kennedy decided the wind was blowing Right that day instead of Left. Roberts, Alito, Thomas, and Scalia are pretty staunchly Conservative, but even Scalia's opinion left an awful lot of wiggle room. He still operates under the misconception that schools and gov't buildings are somehow magical places where a "gun free zone" is the same thing as a "crime free zone". As I write that, it occurs to me that he's correct that they are the same... They're both figments of the imagination of Statists and Leftists. While it's possible he wrote his opinion as he did intentionally, knowing that a true respect of the 2A would not get concurrence from Roberts, Alito, or Thomas, let alone Kennedy, the fact is that Heller was a small victory, almost to the extent of being pyrrhic.

    If Judge Sotomayor is more persuasive than Justice Souter, the next Heller could easily go against us in toto.

    As an aside, I find it interesting that the first two things mentioned about her are her lineage and her gender, when neither has any bearing on her understanding of the Constitution. That someone is a woman or is of Hispanic descent does not make her or him a good or a bad judge, it simply makes them a female or a Hispanic judge. In this case, I think it is just another example of "style over substance".

    Blessings,
    Bill
     
    Top Bottom