Supreme Decision

I meant to blog on this topic on Friday but ended up being too busy to get to it – but yesterday’s Washington Post page one piece only further validated my thoughts that this is a very important blog topic – the election and the Supreme Court.

Last week’s Supreme Court decision to lift the ban on handguns in the District really appalled me. As anyone who is living in DC knows, including the very people sitting on the bench, this spring and summer have been marked with an increase in gun violence and crime in the District. Listening to the radio on the way to work on Friday, all I heard in response to the Court’s decision were comments from police chiefs in cities like Miami and Los Angeles reaffirming the reality that allowing people access to guns isn’t a measure of safety because it almost always ends up being used against them in a crime, or finding its way to the hands of children, etc.

Guns are horrible things. Like Chris Rock said, if the guns are going to be legal, we should make the price of a bullet about $5k each, then we’d see a dramatic drop in random gun violence.

Setting all of that aside – as we think about the election in November – at the end of the day – is there ANYTHING more important than the impact on the Supreme Court, when deciding who should be the next President?

This is what scares me the most about a McCain presidency – the potential for a full conservative take-over of the highest court in the country. Every woman in America should think about that – and every parent of little girls – should think about that – as they cast the vote – and consider how a conservative Supreme Court could very easily overturn a woman’s right to an abortion.

And in case you’ve forgotten, good old maverick, renegade McCain – he’s pro-life, kittens.

This election is pivotal for so many reasons – but along the way – I fear that far too many people aren’t even considering the repercussions of the Supreme Court as they consider voting for McCain.

It’s a Supreme Court election – don’t forget it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/28/AR2008062802078.html?sid=ST2008062900126&pos

 

2 Responses to Supreme Decision
  1. Pat
    July 3, 2008 | 12:44 pm

    Darn persistent Constitution. We could always just amend it rather than keep trying to legislate through the judicial branch.

  2. Arcadia
    September 4, 2008 | 4:10 pm

    If I may, I’d like to offer a counter-point to your argument against guns. Most of the “random” gun violence is not random at all. It is committed by criminals for the purpose of carrying out a crime. Criminals do not care what laws are passed, they are in the business of breaking them.

    Even limiting the question to D.C. alone, I believe the actual statistics show that for ALL of the gun crimes committed in D.C., the vast majority were committed with an ILLEGALLY obtained firearm. Same with the ammo, they STOLE it not bought it.

    Trying to punish lawful gun owners for the crimes of criminals is not good policy. Punishing criminals IS good policy, and I fully support it.

    Owning a legal firearm does not make one into a criminal. Owning a legal firearm can save your life. It can enable you to protect your family in a situation where nothing else will.

    The beauty of the “right to bear arms” is the inherent right not to. No one has ever been forced to handle a firearm. But let me point to the country of Switzerland, where every citizen over the age of 18 — men and women — are required to register with the Swiss Army and be trained in the use of firearms and are government-issued a high-powered assault rifle. The Swiss don’t mess around, they are a tiny country in the middle of Europe who have never been invaded — and they plan to keep it that way.

    Switzerland has a MINISCULE crime rate, per capita. Men and women do not routinely shoot each other in crimes of passion. No one routinely shoots anybody. The presence of all those guns simply does not contribute to an increase in gun crimes.

    Most importantly, in American jurisdictions where there have been gun bans, CRIME HAS INCREASED. Violent crime, against innocent people. Where and when those same cities have repealed the ban, VIOLENT CRIME HAS DECREASED. This is a vitally important point. Criminals do not like armed victims.

    I respect anyone’s aversion to guns and their right to reject them personally. But to reject all Americans’ right to self-protection is to throw the baby out with the bath water. There are many responsible, intelligent gun owners in our country who want current gun laws to be enforced harshly against anyone who breaks the law. Not be trite, but to quote, “Guns don’t kill people, People kill people.”

    P.S. Sarah Palin does not characterize all Women Gun Owners of America ;}

Leave a Reply

Wanting to leave an <em>phasis on your comment?

Trackback URL http://www.wiredmomma.com/2008/06/supreme-decision/trackback/