« Another college gun group | Main | Speaking of war tropies... »
Article on Parker
Human Events has a good piece on it.
"But the deeper reason behind the hysteria over the decision is that for decades the left has been able to make the Constitution into whatever it wanted. The actual words did not matter. When words -- even just 27 words -- mean exactly what they say, then the power to dictate law from a "living" Constitution disappears and liberals are reduced to trying to persuade people that they are right -- a daunting task. When a court can decide that the 2nd Amendment must be respected, the left is on a slippery slope indeed. Who knows what amendment might be rediscovered next? Personally, I vote for the 10th. Regardless, if the trend is allowed to continue, it will be a disaster for the dictatorial left. Thus, I predict the decision will be appealed."
BTW, I, like others, have tended to refer to Parker as "the Cato case," I suppose on the assumption that everything of significance in Washington just has to be pushed by a group of some sort. It was actually brought by two attorneys, Alan Gura and Bob Levy, out of their own pockets. Levy holds a fellowship with Cato, but the case isn't 'in the line of official duty,' as it were.
4 Comments | Leave a comment
For they are jolly good fellows, which nobody can deny!! Though it is by no means a done deal that things will change markedly our way anytime soon, it's a huge step in the right direction and they have done an enormous service for their fellow citizens. It's refreshing to see that there are still a few folks left with a fire in their belly and steel in their spine to fight for what is right. We are in their debt. Still, I find it utterly remarkable that they were able to accomplish, in a few short years (was the case filed in '03?), what the NRA has failed to do in the last 7 decades. What is up with that? This article may shed some light onto the matter;
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20030722-093717-6859r.htm
Could it be that the NRA does truly like the status quo and the revenue that said status quo brings them. It really makes you wonder. In the 215 or so years since the ratification of the Constitution, with the vast weight of the evidence in favor of the individual right POV, how is it that we're still debating exactly what the 2nd means? And in all of the years since the NFA and Miller and the GCA and Hughes, the NRA couldn't find, support and fund a few good, clean cases that would once and for all resolve these ridiculous infringements on the natural rights of law-abiding citizens? Is that rat I smell?
I hope that there are other resolute patriots out there that will keep on pushing further, and build off of this case, until our rights are restored to the way that it was meant to be.
The NRA exists to promote the "moderate" viewpoint, not the accurate viewpoint. The SAF and GOA do a better job of presenting the truth. But, sadly, most of America (Jack Nicholson voice:) just can't handle the truth. So the NRA will say, "The 2nd Amd. isn't about duck hunting," but they will never offend the sheep by putting a picture of a non-sporting arm across the cover of the American Rifleman.
And I fear the suspicions of conspiracy are at least partly accurate. Hillary Clinton is the best fundraiser that the Republican party has. Perhaps Carolyn McCarthy is the best fundraiser that the NRA has. A little continued fear of future gun control keeps those member rolls increasing and keeps the donations coming in.
Clark Neilly from the American Enterprise Institute helped with the Parker case too.
A toast! To Gura and Levy, and to the Bill of Rights!