[clue-talk] Heller

[Jed S. Baer]

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:37:21 -0600
David Rudder wrote:

> On one hand. this seems to me to be a perfect example of judicial 
> activism.  The gun control laws were made by the dutifully elected 
> officials of DC.  They were trod upon by the appointed elite of the 
> SCOTUS.  SCOTUS further explicitly denied the original intent of the 
> constitution and decided that the states' constitutions provided a 
> better legal guide than the federal constitution we all know.  Another 
> instance of the twisted reasoning this court will go through to justify 
> their own political agendas.

Seriously?

The Constitution was written specifically to take power away from elected
officials, and to set limits on what laws could be passed. There is no
judicial "activism" in applying the way it was intended. There was no
denial of original intent at all, as the ruling clearly explained in its
textual analysis. State constitutions are of no interest, other than
guaging prevailing attitudes at the time of passage, which the opinion
noted. Because D.C. is a federal district, not a state, and hence has no
state constitution, the federal one is the one that applies. As far as
the "we all know", well I, as well as many legal scholars, know what the
2nd Amendment is all about, and is sure as heck doesn't allow the sort of
gun control the D.C. had implemented. It's just a shame that it took so
long to get it tossed out.

Just curious, David, as to where you've gotten your opinion of what "we
all know" is.

The D.C. city council deserved to be trod upon. They should be ejected
from office, IMHO, for so blatantly violating what is a fundamental human
right -- that of self preservation.

But then I expected you to feel this way about it. :)

jed