Posted by
Boomer911 on Thursday, June 26, 2008 8:05:28 PM
“The Constitution shall never be construed... to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” —Samuel Adams
The United States Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in favor of an individuals right to keep and bear arms was the latest in a series of opinions handed down from the high court. However, this is one the American people should rightly celebrate. Why, you may ask? Well, the Supreme Court used a strict constructionist approach to arrive at their decision, at least as far as the majority opinion is concerned. A course of action that has been all to prevelent in the last 50-60 years has been the actions of liberal judges using everything but the Constitution, including foreign laws, global litmus tests, and their own left-wing ideologies, to force issues down the throats of the American people by assuming the Constitutional role of the legislature. These left-wing ideologies and and new "rights" not found in the Constitution are issues that democrats could never pass at the ballot box. I have eluded to the threat posed to our freedoms by the runaway judiciary in an earlier post.
But what strikes me the most as I read the various blogs and commentaries on today's decision is how many now see the judiciary as an extention of an ideology and an administration. One went even so far as to say conservatism beat liberalism 5-4. See, I don't see it so much as conservatism as I do constructionism. The ridiculous dog and pony shows that the judiciary nominees have to endure are a perfect example of the role the left thinks the judiciary should play in our system of government. "Whats your views on guns, abortion, the death penalty, and so on...", are some of the ridiculous questions nominees must answer during the confirmation hearings. Whatever happened to upholding the Constitution and using it as the basis on which your decisions are based? The United States Constitution is the only criteria to be used by the justices.
As usual, The Heritage Foundation says it best in its commentary on the issue:
Far-left critics of the decision are already claiming that the decision represents “
judicial activism.” Nothing could be further from the truth.
Justice Antonin Scalia’s
majority opinion is a textbook example of constitutional originalism. Using simple grammar and crystal-clear logic, Scalia destroys the argument of dissenting Justice John Paul Stevens that the first half of the
Second Amendment — “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State” — negates the second — “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Scalia writes:
Logic demands that there be a link between the stated purpose and the command. The Second Amendment would be nonsensical if it read, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to petition for redress of grievances shall not be infringed." … That requirement of logical connection may cause a prefatory clause to resolve an ambiguity in the operative clause. But apart from that clarifying function, a prefatory clause does not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause.
Justice Stephen Breyer’s defense is equally specious, constructing a convoluted balancing test that ultimately reaches the conclusion that the state’s interest in controlling crime outweighs an individuals right to bear arms. Nevermind that since the District of Columbia first instituted its ban on handguns, there has been only one year (1985) that the homicide rate in the city fell below what it was in 1976. Worse, in 15 of the 29 years since the ban went into effect, D.C. had either the first or second highest murder rate among the nation's 50 largest cities. A National Academy of Sciences report based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and a survey of 80 different gun-control laws, shows no link between restrictions on gun ownership and lower rates of crime, firearms violence or even accidents with guns.
Even if the court’s four far-left members who dissented in the decision do not understand the issue, the American people do. According to Gallup, 73% of the U.S. public believes the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the rights of Americans to own guns. And almost 7 out of 10 Americans are opposed to a law that would make the possession of a handgun illegal.
I will close with a quote from James Madison, the Father of The Constitution:
"I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense alone it is the legitimate Constitution. ... If the meaning of the text be sought in the changeable meaning of the words composing it, it is evident that the shape and attributes of the Government must partake of the changes to which the words and phrases of all living languages are constantly subject. What a metamorphosis would be produced in the code of law if all its ancient phraseology were to be taken in its modern sense. And that the language of our Constitution is already undergoing interpretations unknown to its founder, will I believe appear to all unbiassed Enquirers into the history of its origin and adoption."