The AP is carrying a story on it, along with the Bar Association journal. I understand from folks on the ground in Illinois that gun control groups in the Land of Lincoln are having a cow over this. The national groups have already classified this as an affront to democracy (which begs the question as to whether they believe grand juries are likewise an affront to democracy). I think it’s really important to highlight this quote from the press release, because it tells you exactly what the gun control crowd stands for:
Our message is this: we will no longer use the power and authority of our office to criminalize and punish decent, otherwise law-abiding citizens who choose to exercise the rights granted to them by the Second Amendment of the United States’ Constitution to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and their families.
This is what they are freaking out about. It’s not criminals possessing guns, it’s not drug dealers possessing guns — they are freaking out because a prosecutor has declared he’s not going to try to put otherwise law-abiding, honest people in prison.
By their lights, a gun owner is by definition a criminal who hasn’t been caught. Yet.
I must point out that any Obama supporters out there have no standing to complain about selective enforcement of the law. Dozier is simply following Obama’s example.
exactly! I’ve tried to convince my liberal friends that using/abusing the power of an office to promote an agenda can and will cut both ways. Obama’s actions have real consequences. This prosecutor is retiring this fall and there’s a democrat running unopposed for the position, so this really isn’t anything more than making a statement to start a conversation. Hope the conversation continues, but the way Illinois works the only way it’s going to change is when the supreme court says in no uncertain terms that laws X Y and Z are no longer valid.
Well, do note that here there is at least a question of which law to follow, Illinois or Federal, which through 14th Amendment incorporation applies to the states.
The law that Obama’s following is “I won.”
Right on, alanstorm!!!! Obama has made a career out of not enforcing/supporting laws he doesn’t like, including immigration laws and the Defense of Marriage Act.
Just a quick note:
It really bugs me when people on our side of things refer to rights as being “granted” by our constitution. In every single instance where a “grant” of rights is mentioned, it would be better to refer to our rights as being *protected* by the constitution. The use of the term “grant” implies very strongly that the existence of a right depends on government for its existence.
The choice of words really does matter.
Well said, sir!!!!