Category: 2nd Amendment

There is no Second Amendment to possess a machine gun in the 8th Circuit now.  The case cited U.S. vs. Fincher as supporting case law within the circuit when crafting the decision:

In United States v. Fincher, 538 F.3d 868, 873-74 (8th Cir. 2008), the Eighth Circuit held that the defendant’s possession of a machine gun was not protected by the Second Amendment under Heller: “Machine guns are not in common use by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes and therefore fall within the category of dangerous and unusual weapons that the government can prohibit for individual use.”

This is why I don’t jump on board in support when people do stupid things that end screwing the rest of us.  This is a prime example of that in action.

Dave Kopel has coauthored a working paper with Nelson Lund that counters Judge Wilkinson’s notion that Heller was overreaching, just like Roe.  We should be thankful we have academic folks willing to step up and counter these notions once they are floated.  Now that gun rights has entered the courts as well as the legislatures, it’ll be important for influencing legal opinioin on these matters.

Says Judge Wilkinson of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals:

Writing for the Virginia Law Review, Judge Wilkinson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit says that Heller, like Roe, was disrespectful of legislative judgments, has hurled courts into a political thicket of fine-tuning policy in interminable litigation and traduced federalism. Furthermore, Heller exposed “originalism” — the doctrine that the Constitution’s text means precisely what those who wrote its words meant by them — as no barrier to “judicial subjectivity.”

Yes, except the Second Amendment is right there, staring at you in the face in the Bill of Rights.  It’s not to be found emanating from any penumbras.

Cam Edwards points out a sorry testament to the state of education in this country.

Reason did a great article on the making of the Heller case.

From a UCLA Professor of Anthropology:

I don’t know where to begin on the current state of insanity in the U.S. Let’s see, maybe guns is a good place to start. Gun sales are reported to have risen noticeably since Obama was elected. Some of this was probably just the usual paranoid insanity of the NRA gun nuts. Some are convinced that Obama means to take their guns away. If that were true, what would be the point of buying more? But of course these new guns, along with all the others they possess, could be hidden for use when the government tries to take over their guns. When you suggest to these nuts that their rifles, pistols, and even AK 47’s wouldn’t be much use against the weapons the government could employ they either look blank or argue they should be allowed 50 caliber machine guns and even howitzers and tanks. As one of them put it the other day, “if you can tow it behind your pickup it ought to be legal.” Who can argue against such logic (insanity). As near as I can determine Obama has a perfectly sensible approach to the problem of guns, recognizing the difference between the needs of rural dwellers and inner city gangs and etc. He has never suggested taking away everyone’s guns. But nothing is sensible when it comes to the NRA.

I’m always amazed at the total lack of respect of people of the left have for our beliefs and arguments.  Just crass dismissal, without even an attempt to intellectually refute us.  You’re just “nuts” and “paranoid.”  Especially when it’s pretty clear this university professor has never bothered to investigate Obama’s record on guns, which includes a lengthy career of trying to destroy the Second Amendment.

And finally, there is the tired notion of an armed population being obsolete.  I’ve said in the past, you can’t stop your government from killing you, but the use of political violence, which is one of the evils that the Second Amendment is meant to protect against, is not about killing for the sake of killing, it’s about coercion.  It’s about forcing people to submit to the will of others who wish to rule over them.

These are radical ideas, and not something I think most people sitting in the ivory towers of academia really wish to think about.  I can’t say I blame them.  They are unpleasant ideas, representing circumstances very different than we currently face. But societies looking to avoid such unpleasantness have often found it, and been unprepared.  Our good professor would like to dismiss us because we choose to engage in the intellectual exercise.  It’s part of the Bill of Rights, and something our founders, having just emerged from a successful revolution, thought about a great deal.  I think we do them a disservice if we don’t keep their ideas alive and relevant, regardless of how sound our political system is at the moment.

I was sitting in a chair in the hotel where the NRA Board Meeting is being held, and heard David E. Young joking “I guess they let bloggers in here.”

I looked over to see who was with him, and it’s Alan Gura! Looks like he’ll be at the Presidents Reception. The fun thing is so will Bitter and I.

UPDATE: Talked to Alan Gura for like 15 minutes about various cases! Cool! He called me Sebastian, so he’s at least an occasional reader. The second amendment is in good hands. All the scholars including the blogosphere’s own Dave Hardy were recognized for their contributions to Heller.