John Longenecker, as usual, has an article full of quotable stuff. I’ll have to wait until tonight when I have the time to add all of them to my database. Just a sample:
That’s right – Unconstitutional. It may go to the Supreme Court, but for now, it’s ruled by an Appeal Courts and it has legal significance. There is a 30-day stay of execution, I believe, and D.C. Mare Fenty has announced that his city intends to defy the court ruling and continue to enforce the ban.
Nation of laws, my eye. Don’t ever trust a liberal who ever says again that we are a nation of laws.
There is no such thing as sensible gun laws.
Meanwhile, the court has deemed that City’s gun ban unconstitutional – especially upbraiding because the matter involves defiance of a civil right. If you preside over gun control, you break your oath of office from Day One and every day thereafter.
This is huge this way. The Second Amendment is a civil right ignored by a champion of civil rights in the nation’s capitol. What a wonderful example of the party in Congress at this time. What a wonderful example of governance in action.
Coerced dependency is the goal in making violent crime a crisis. They think it’s leadership, but it’s really farming a crop of their own. The tragedy is that the crisis is developed with the full knowledge and utter indifference that people will be hurt when unable to defend themselves, when criminals are turned loose, but that this is somehow necessary for some far-off ultimate social justice. Or business as usual.
I would like to see just one proponent of the DC gun ban explain why he/she cares so much, or seesw this as such a loss. Other cities have vastly more guns in private hands and at the same time far less of a crime problem. Do they actually want high crime? Maybe, somewhere deep down inside, they do.
Then again, it makes little difference how a bigot thinks, when it is plain that they are bigots. Bigots must only be defeated. Understanding what makes them tick is of purely academic interest.