Whipped Cream Difficulties

The news is still coming in. I’ll try to link to good commentary as it comes in, and I’ll have some thoughts of my own up later, probably tonight.

I have my own concerns about the decision and What It All Means, but for right now: There. Will. Be. Cake.

Edited to add 1: For right now, I think the best source of information I can point folks to is Sebastian’s live blog over at Snowflakes in Hell. Also noteworthy: Jacob Sullum over at Reason’s “Hit and Run”.

Edited to add 2: SayUncle is in his usual short but pithy commentary mode. Some good stuff there, too.

Edited to add 3: As promised, some thoughts of my own. With these and $2, I think you can get a large cup of coffee in most places.

• When the decision in Heller came down, I was at my very first Smith and Wesson Collector’s Association convention. When the decision in McDonald came down, I was…at work. I feel slightly cheated.
• Like Heller, this should not have been a 5-4 decision. This should have been a 9-0 decision. It is a sad and awful thing that four justices of the United States Supreme Court do not understand basic written English. Especially appalling is Justice Stevens’ dissent. Damon Root has a good post over at the Reason blog, but let me single out this section of the dissent:

…even apart from the States’ long history of firearms regulation and its location at the core of their
police powers, this is a quintessential area in which federalism ought to be allowed to flourish without this Court’s meddling. Whether or not we can assert a plausible constitutional basis for intervening, there are powerful reasons why we should not do so.

Echoing Root’s point, Stevens apparently believes that the Second Amendment is somehow special and different from the others, in a way that allows experimentation and tinkering. Is there anyone who thinks Stevens would endorse experimenting with the First Amendment?  (Sebastian has another solid post up about Scalia’s shredding of Stevens’ “reasoning”.)

• With the decision being this close, could it be reversed if the makeup of the court changes substantially? Kagan’s replacing Stevens, so that won’t change anything. But what if we lose Thomas or Scalia? I was talking this over with my good friend James at work; my point was that the court generally sets a pretty high bar before they overturn established precedent (the word I was looking for was “stare decisis“). But it isn’t unheard of: the Supreme Court ruled in 1940 (Minersville School District v. Gobitis) that it was perfectly okay to force Jehovah’s Witnesses to salute the flag. (In a 8-1 decision, no less.) Somebody came to their senses, because they reversed that decision in 1943. (West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, and that was 6-3.) (I’m not really happy about linking to Wikipedia for summaries of these cases, but I’m just trying to make a quick and dirty point.)
• What worries me the most is that we’re going to let our guard down. Heller and McDonald did serious damage to the anti-Second Amendment crowd. But they were not death blows. The most dangerous time in a fight is when you have your enemy pinned; if you’re not well trained, you let your guard down, and your enemy has nothing to lose.
  
  What does the right to keep and bear arms mean if there’s no one making guns and gun parts because there’s no market? Or all the gun makers are driven out of business by lawsuits? (Yes, I know the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was supposed to stop that. Good luck.) I can easily imagine Daley, or some other politician: “Sure, you have the right to bear arms. Hope you enjoy that 1,000% tax on ammunition and components. Oh, did I say 1,000%? Let’s try 10,000%.” (Don’t accuse me of giving these people ideas; Schumer’s proposed this before.)
  
  We are not out of the woods. We will not be out of the woods until we establish (or re-establish) a pro-gun culture, until the pro-gun control organizations close due to lack of funds, and until Daley the Younger is where he really belongs; in a prison cell.
  
  I signed up for the Second Amendment Foundation today; I encourage you to do the same. (I really should have done that sooner.) I’ve already joined the Texas State Rifle Association; actually, I joined a couple of weeks ago after hearing Alice Tripp speak to the Austin Rifle Club. (If you have a chance to hear her speak, don’t pass it up; she’s great.) Recent problems aside, I still believe the NRA is an organization worthy of your support.
  
  We can take a day to enjoy our cake (or pie, if that’s how you roll; Whipped Cream Difficulties is ecumenical on the cake/pie question) and celebrate, but we can’t let our guard down now.

This entry was posted on Monday, June 28th, 2010 at 9:27 am and is filed under Guns, Law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.