Parker to the court: The pants shitting hysterics
That really frosted their nads. It’s like they already lost, or something. Some responses from the antis:
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership:
“The Appeals Court decision striking down the District of Columbia handgun law was a highly questionable example of judicial activism. It ignored longstanding U.S. Supreme Court precedent, discounted the express language of the Second Amendment, and substituted the policy preferences of two federal judges for those of local elected officials and the citizens they represent.
“If the U.S. Supreme Court decides to hear this case, it could produce the most significant Second Amendment ruling in our history. If the U.S. Supreme Court follows the words of the U.S. Constitution and the Court’s own precedents, it should reverse the Appeals Court ruling and allow the District’s law to stand.”
So many lies in two paragraphs. Amazing.
Have you been reading the papers, your honor? You don’t have to be Linda Greenhouse to realize this court will care for the sovereignty of the District about as much as it does for the sovereignty of high-school students to spout vaguely drug-related nonsense.
Not sure who the constitutional-law genius was who had the mayor’s ear on this one. The macho we-gotta-stand-up-for-our-rights talk is admirable, but even Clarence Darrow wouldn’t take this case to a court where it not only probably won’t win, but threatens to impose bad law on the rest of the country, too.
“The earlier split decision by the Court of Appeals to overturn the District of Columbia’s handgun ban was not only contrary to the overwhelming weight of legal authority, but would certainly increase gun death and injury among District residents while also increasing the risks faced by the law enforcement personnel who protect all residents and workers in Washington, DC.
“Washington, DC’s ban on handguns in the home has long protected DC’s residents as measured by the District of Columbia’s firearm suicide and overall suicide rate. The District’s handgun ban provides compelling evidence of how strict gun laws save lives by keeping handguns out of homes. The District of Columbia ranks 51st (last) in the country for firearms suicide for 2004, the most recent year for which statistics are available. The District also ranks last for overall suicide. Maintaining the ban will ensure the health and safety of DC residents.
Protected their residents? Err, you read the paper right?
The AP kinda gets it right.
July 17th, 2007 at 9:12 am
Oh, that’s precious. It ranks “51st” if you compare a medium sized city to the other fifty states.
The VPC should start selling tops. They’re experts at spinning things.
July 17th, 2007 at 9:24 am
yeah, and notice they mention suicides only and not homicides.
July 17th, 2007 at 10:48 am
“The Appeals Court decision striking down the District of Columbia handgun law was a highly questionable example of judicial activism.
Wow. That is amazing. I wonder what else they think is judicial activism?
July 17th, 2007 at 11:24 am
“Judicial activism”?? Finally it was an instance of the judges being “bound the law” as is demanded by the wording of the Constitution (Article VI, sections 1-3) and ruling in favor of “the right of the people” in the 2nd Amendment.
July 17th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
“Right of the People”? Apparently the BC convieniently forgot that part:
July 17th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
What a wonderful and logical position those anti’s have…
DC’s case won’t win in a court [because it’s unconstitutional] so striking down an unconstitutional law threatens to impose bad law on the rest of the country.
Now don’t that just beat watching cats have sex… Constitutional = bad, unConstitutional = good.
And what “sovereignty of the District”…
Article 1, section 8
Oh yeah…Constitutional = bad, unConstitutional = good.
July 17th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
I think we’re seeing what happens when you take an irrational position (anti-freedom). People start using rational arguments against you, and you’re forced into more and more irrationality. Their last-ditch option is always brute force. Keep an eye on them.
July 17th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Just to be an asshole, I’ll point out that there have been a whole bunch of decisions from federal appeals courts against individual right interpretation of the 2nd amendment. Many are listed in the government’s brief in the Emerson case. Oddly, while the 5th Circuit affirmed that the 2nd guarantees an individual right, they didn’t strike down the unconstitutional law under which Emerson was indicted. The federal judiciary has mostly been in the VPC/Brady camp.
Please note that I believe that the 2nd amendment guarantees an individual right, and that the judges who have ruled otherwise should be hanged, drawn, and quartered.
July 18th, 2007 at 1:57 am
“yeah, and notice they mention suicides only and not homicides”
That’s because if the violence policy center mentioned homocides it would shoot down their argument that DC is safer with guns being banned. It would also show that DC is one of the 5 most violent cities in the country. (and would show that gun control dont work)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate
July 22nd, 2007 at 1:16 am
“Da Mayor” says that even with D.C.’s large number of homicides, people’s
lives have been saved because of their gun control. HUH???
The VPC says more people will die if the “law????” is overturned.
Do we care if the trogs are killed???? I certainly don’t. To me it means that the good people will continue to live.
OBTW, D.C. has 348 unsolved homicides on the books and thats just the last 4 1/2 years worth.