Left Coast Right Mind on December 21, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Right, because after expanding gun rights under the second amendment, Roberts is just going to turn around and kill a precedent established by his court.

Laws don’t prevent squat. They just outline potential consequences for their violation.

ProfShadow on December 21, 2012 at 11:17 AM

That is some profund stuff there Prof. I wonder how many people actually think its THE LAW that stops people from breaking it.

hat tip

HarryBackside on December 21, 2012 at 11:37 AM

Simple. Call a weapons ban a tax and John Roberts would steamroll an animal shelter full of puppies to uphold it.

looking to draw a line between guns needed for legitimate purposes, such as self-defense, and guns used for killing people. Looks like they’re the same.

Golly. Who’da thunk it? Weapons intended for self-defense are the same ones intended to inflict great personal injury and death. Wow. Never would have figured this……….

Yes, firearms are intended for only one purpose, folks: to inflict greivous bodily harm (often fatal) upon that at which it is aimed. That. Is. The. Point.

Axeman on December 21, 2012 at 12:09 PM

The Roberts court wouldnt be overturning 100 years of jurisprudence from other courts. They would have to overturn two decisions from the current court. Big difference.

The court could uphold a ban, but that would require over turning two second amendment decisions made by the very same court. Good luck with that.

HarryBackside on December 21, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Nah. A lib SCOTUS just needs to ignore. The media outside our “bubble” is not going to bring up Heller or any other decision that doesn’t work their way.

Take a look at it this way: A similar group of people who argued that companies that produce pornography had a “first amendment right” thought it was ludicrous that other companies enjoyed a similar right and that deciding so “overturned 100 years of jurisprudence” (except when such a right applied to the commerce of pornography).

It’s a matter of slogans not any sort of rigorous logic.

Brought to you by the Chicago Democrat Party Machine.

Left Coast Right Mind on December 21, 2012 at 11:28 AM

True, but the court didn’t have to wipe out two of their previous decisions on the Obamacare ruling. In order for the court to uphold an assault weapons ban, they would have to over rule the same courts ruling in Heller and the Chicago case.

The reason Newtown works for the Libs is that its part of the safe, suburban, soccer-mom world. The fact that 400+ people have been shot in Chicago, a city with some of the toughest gun laws in the country, is ignored because its the inner city and everyone expects it. No one on the left is willing to stand up and say “why?”

clippermiami on December 21, 2012 at 11:27 AM

I read an article about that same thing. Because Newtown was 95% white and represented a Norman Rockwell painting and a slice out of 1950s Americana, the libs get alot more mileage out of it. The public has become desensitized to Chicago so the media doesn’t care about the kids killed there.