United Liberty

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in McDonald v. Chicago on Tuesday, a case that deals with the City of Chicago’s restrictive gun laws:

On one side are the law-abiding city dwellers who say they need guns to protect themselves from armed thugs. Among them is Otis McDonald, who says he is worried about the armed drug dealers on the streets in his Morgan Park neighborhood.

“I only want a handgun in my home for my protection,” said McDonald, 76.

On the other side are prosecutors and police who say the city’s ban on handguns gives them a legal basis for confronting gang members and drug dealers.

“If an officer sees a bulge in a pocket, he can stop and frisk that person,” said Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez.
[…]
Regardless of who prevails, the case of McDonald vs. Chicago figures to be a landmark in the history of the 2nd Amendment and its “right to keep and bear arms.” It will decide whether the 2nd Amendment applies only to federal gun laws or if it can be used across the nation to strike down state and local gun restrictions.

What the plantiffs hope to do, in addition to bringing more reasonable gun laws to Chicago, is incorporate the Second Amendment to the states through the Due Process Clause of Fourteenth Amendment.

Going back to the Heller case, it was fairly obvious how the court was going to rule during the oral arguments. Justice Anthony Kennedy was the swing vote and he made his views on the Second Amendment fairly clear.

The NRA is seeking incorporation of the Second Amendment to the states:

One day after losing a major test case in an appeals court on the scope of the Second Amendment, the National Rifle Association — the nation’s leading advocate of personal gun rights — asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday to apply the Amendment to state, county and city government laws that seek to regulate firearms. The petition was announced by the NRA in this news release.; The petition will be posted as soon as it becomes available.

 

Gun sales have rocketed since the election of Barack Obama on fears that he will restrict or eliminate the right  of individuals to bear arms. Obama supporters call the wave “fearmongering by the gun lobby” which has some merit, but middle America would probably rather be safe than sorry when it comes to their guns.

Bet he’d be glad for them to play a role in the Republican Party right now…

One thing that has been overlooked this election cycle is Obama’s stance on gun rights. In my opinion he has been given a free-ride by the liberal “old media” and without independent organizations the issue would pretty much a non-issue. Any candidate that receives an enthusiastic endorsement by Moveon.org should be looked on with extreme suspicion by gun owners, such as myself. There is an AR-15 here in my apartment and do not be naive enough to think Obama does not want to confiscate it; the only thing stopping him is potential public outrage and independent organizations such as the GOA & NRA.

When it comes to the 2nd Amendment who is the political gunslinger? Let’s go beyond the rhetoric.

It’s a question we need to look at closely, especially as the election draws near. Shutting off the media circus for a bit, lets look at these candidates strictly on issues. Then see what we come up with.

Sure enough, today we got a great article to back us up.

Kevin Tracy over at ktracy.com wrote a great post laying out, quite simply, why the NRA looks positioned to endorse Bob Barr. As many of you know, the NRA endorsement is something that most Republican’s sweep each year and is considered to be one of the bigger endorsements Presidential candidates seek. Bob Dole missed out on it in 1996 with his assault gun ban flip-flop, but other than that, the NRA is usually a GOP lock. This year however, the Libertarians have fielded Bob Barr, and he isn’t just a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, he’s quite a bit more…

When Ron Paul was asked by Reason Magazines’s Dave Weigel about write-in ballots, he had this to say-

“I don’t think that’s very productive,” Paul said of a write-in campaign. “They could do it, of course, but in most of the states it won’t count. If they can change the rules in a primary and not count all the votes, imagine what they could do with write-in votes!”