Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Local Gun Control Overturned

The American Conservative's Matt Cockerill, on "landmark Supreme Court decision [that] strikes down Chicago’s handgun ban," suggests that "a justice more strictly devoted to the Constitution’s original design, before the rise of the incorporation doctrine, would have had to acquiesce to arbitrary and immoral handgun confiscations carried out by state and local governments" — Shooting the Constitution?

"So should paleoconservatives and libertarians welcome the ruling?" he asks. "It depends whether one prioritizes individual liberty or the Constitution. Most of the time, these principles don’t conflict. But cases like today’s remind us they’re not inextricably bound." This blogger joins the dissenters on the grounds of localism, decentralism, and constitutionalism.

Labels: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share


Blogger The Sanity Inspector said...

The big urban areas frequently complain about how crime spikes in their jurisdictions because of guns brought in from elsewhere. A problem, maybe; but they should also remember that the only place the police have an easy job is in a police state.

1:15 PM  
Blogger Stephen said...

I'm of two minds on this one. On the whole, I don't like the 14th Amendment precisely because of the federal meddling in state and local affairs it introduced.

That said, that 14th is the law of the land, so I'm glad to see it being applied to the 2nd Amendment where it previously had not been.

10:21 PM  
Anonymous love the girls said...

"But today, Scalia applied it to protect liberty."

Nonsense. What Scalia did was violate subsidiarity, a fundamental principle of society in preference of a civil right.

3:27 AM  
Anonymous Abdul Alhazred said...

I understand the arguments for localism, decentralism, etc. I hardly expect the culture of New York City, Chicago, or San Francisco to be the same as communities in Arizona, Texas, North Carolina, or Wyoming.

It's just that the city governments of Chicago and D.C. went way too far in their anti-gun zealotry -- they went out of their way to deprive law-abiding citizens of their right to self-defense -- in the idiotic belief that disarming the law-abiding majority would somehow affect the criminal minority. (Well, it affected criminals in one way: it made it easier for them to attack their victims. Only a liberal would be surprised by this...)

Regulations about background checks, waiting periods, etc. are one thing. A total ban -- or virtual total ban -- on the law-abiding citizen's right to self-defense & gun ownership is something totally different.

To hell with Mayor Daley and the Chicago city government. Same goes for the morons in D.C.

9:30 AM  
Anonymous Abdul Alhazred said...

One other thing: I couldn't help but laugh when I saw the Japan tv news coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on this.

Being 100 percent ignorant of the concept of an individual right to self-defense, the Japanese NHK news program merely parrotted the anti-gun propaganda that the Chicago handgun ban was directly responsible for "reducing gun crime in Chicago" over a 16-year period.

I had to wonder: wasn't the Chicago ban introduced a lot earlier than 16 years ago? Like back in 1982, wasn't it? And hasn't the entire U.S. experienced an overall drop in crime over the past 15 or 16 years -- and that's with many states adopting more pro-gun ownership policies?

And isn't the violent crime rate of Chicago still at least double that of NY or LA? (Yes, it is!)


9:35 AM  
Blogger The Western Confucian said...

Koreans tend to have the same view of guns, and are perfectly happy with giving the "authorities" the monopoly on defending the innocent.

12:36 PM  
Anonymous Abdul Alhazred said...

During the Tokugawa Era in Japan, only the samurai were allowed to carry weapons. A relatively peaceful country it was -- at the cost of a military dictatorship under the shogunate.

Individual rights? I don't know -- if you, an ordinary citizen, happened to even look at a passing samurai in the wrong way, he had the right to unleash his sword and behead you on the spot.

Most Japanese people, apparently, continue to believe that the authorities should have a monopoly on firearms. While streetcrime is rare in Japan, home invasion is not unknown -- every so often you read or watch tv news about some poor soul -- usually a beautiful girl or an elderly woman -- attacked, sometimes raped, and then murdered in her own home.

(At this point, turning away from my newspaper or television in disgust, I can't help thinking that the victim might have had more of a fighting chance if she had owned a gun...instead of only a telephone.)

The friendly Japanese police will then show up to take pictures of the dead body, cover the crime scene with blue tarps, get out their measuring tapes, and then return to the local police box for a cup of green tea.

4:07 PM  
Blogger Stephen said...

As gun rights advocates are fond of reminding us, "A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone."

11:28 PM  
Blogger The Western Confucian said...

Also in Korea, street crime is also unknown, but there's a reason everyone up to the third floor has bars on their windows unlike the town I grew up in, where you could leave your doors unlocked.

Home invasions often occur here. My wife had her house robbed when she was a kid, while she and her sisters were present, and several of my students have reported the same, one of whom was locked in a closet. Fortunately, no rape was committed, which is often the case.

Also, deadly or even injurious force is not permitted in self-defense. I even remember hearing of a women years ago prosecuted for biting off her rapist's tongue, although it may be an urban legend.

My students are usually aghast when I tell them that in the US, if someone breaks into your house, you can shoot them.

7:16 AM  
Blogger The Western Confucian said...

That said, back to the topic, it is the people of Chicago, not the Supreme Court, who should be defending Chicagoans gun rights.

7:21 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Omnes Sancti et Sanctæ Coreæ, orate pro nobis.