For many of us, the *only* position we agree with Barack Hussein Obama on even somewhat is LGBT civil rights, and even then, many of us have reservations about issues such as hate crimes legislation. For example, I truly don’t care *why* someone is having the crud kicked out of them by a band of thugs, I merely desire that it stop immediately and that very bad and consistent things happen to the thugs regardless of the reason for the beating, excepting self-defense (and I have great difficulty imagining 5:1 as self-defense).

For us, it is the *act* that offends far more than the reason – at least partially because telepathy is not required to ascertain most criminal acts, where divining the reason for misbehavior is much more treacherous.

Blessed with lawful carry, we are in a position to choose defend ourselves and our loved ones against the bullies, bigots, and generally bad persons that would harass, assault, maim, or kill us.

Gay Cynic
June 15, 2008
The Endless Contest
[On why the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Trans-sexual (LGBT) crowd should hold their noses and vote for McCain this fall.–Joe]

The court says, for instance, that the Heller decision does not mean to cast doubt on longstanding bans on felons having possession of firearms, or bans on the mentally incompetent having possession of weapons, bans on weapons in sensitive places and restrictions on the sale and purchase of weapons. But to say you’re not casting into doubt those things is not the same thing as to say that those laws are all constitutionally permissible. And indeed, if the court was saying those are all constitutionally permissible laws, there’s certainly no argument in the opinion or justification for why those laws are constitutional and the D.C. handgun ban is not constitutional.

Adam Winkler
July 17, 2008
Heller’s Fallout The Court’s Decision Raises More Legal Questions Than It Answers
[Excellent point! I had been annoyed that the Brady Bunch and other have been saying all these various restrictions were constitutional and I couldn’t find it in the Heller decision. All I could find was that the Heller decision didn’t apply to those restriction. I presumed that was because those weren’t at issue in the Heller case. I’m glad someone with more legal expertise agrees with my reading of this. Hence my reading of Heller is that the court is inviting challenges to those restrictions.–Joe]

Which do I have to check at the door, my Fourth Amendment rights, my First Amendment rights or my Second Amendment rights?

Mike Brown
Troy Idaho Attorney
July 16, 2008
Borne arms
[This was on the topic of guns being carried to city council meetings, inside the state capital, and other public meeting places. Mike is the founder of Idaho Sport Shooters Alliance. He is also a top notch handgun shooter.–Joe]

Presumptuous paternalists argue that Americans should be deprived of guns because gun owners are their own worst enemies. A lot of Americans would reply: We can’t trust ourselves, but we can trust you?

Steve Chapman
July 13, 2008
Is buying a gun a suicidal act?
[Nice! The other day Sebastian said we need to be ready to counter the suicide angle. I think this is excellent response.–Joe]

Despicable.

The ACLU joins the NRA as the advocates of cowards, sneak thieves and psycopaths. I challenge Mr. Peck to identify where in the 2nd Amendment or any Federalist Paper is found the right to bear arms for “self protection.”

You will soon be receiving the bloody shoes of the victims from across the nation.

The illegal guns that flood Cleveland and Detroit and Chicago come from your redneck gun shows and gun shops. I understand now why Nevadans need 8 or 10 guns: people this offensively stupid must have thousands of enemies. Add to that throng the families of the kids that get killed every day just because you need those pistols to feel like men. You’re pathetic weaklings.

It’s sad that when it comes to guns, what happens in Vegas bleeds throughout the rest of the country.

esquared
7:34 AM July 11, 2008
A comment to the article: Only in Nevada: ACLU opposes gun control–State affiliate bucks national stance, supporting the right to bear arms
[I think the article needs some comments to counterbalance those of this bigot. The ACLU blog post on the 2^nd Amendment is up to nearly 1000 comments now with no significant sign of sympathy for their position.–Joe]

Amicae therefore contend that depriving women of the right to possess a handgun in the privacy of their own homes reflects at best an insensitivity to women’s unique needs created by their inherent gender characteristics. A handgun simply is the best means of self-defense for those who generally lack the upper body strength to successfully wield a shotgun or other long gun. To therefore deny half the population a handgun, as the District and the Office of the Solicitor General urge, evinces the “blindness or indifference” to women that only perpetuates women’s vulnerability to physical subordination.

M. Carol Bambery
Brief of amicae curiae 126 women state legislators and academics in support of respondent.
[About 70% of my firearms students are women wanting to get their concealed carry permits. As I have said before getting women out to the range is one of the things we must do to win the battle against the anti-gun bigots.–Joe]

Have pity for the moderators here. I haven’t seen such a sh!tstorm descend on any one target since Jim Zumbo dined on his foot. Wow.

Nomen Nescio
Comment 285 at the ACLU blob post “Heller Decision and the Second Amendment”.
[Yup. The comments are moderated, probably to keep the spam out, and there are now 668 comments. I suspect there are a couple hundred more waiting for moderation. My count is two supported the ACLU, one was neutral, and 665 were negative. Plus there is a gathering storm in the comments to this post as well.–Joe]