An English twit mourns the Heller ruling
Commentary from a whiny elitist twit British subject living in America. Something which irks me too is his capitalization of the words militia and arms in the 2nd amendment. Apparently people having rights is something foreign to him.
Here’s an excerpt:
“You can live in a country for more than a dozen years. You can marry one of its citizens, and watch your son grow up to be one of its citizens. Yet on occasion, here in the United States, I still feel like an alien from the opposite end of the universe.
This week provided one of those moments, when the Supreme Court threw out the District of Columbia’s 32-year ban on handgun ownership, ruling in the process that the second amendment of the country’s constitution guaranteed the right of every American to possess firearms.
A statement of the blindingly obvious, you might think, given that the gun population of the US is not far short of its 300 million human one. But that did not prevent this affirmation of the status quo being trumpeted by leading newspapers, with headlines of the size normally reserved for terrorist attacks and presidential election results.
The majority and dissenting opinions in the 5-4 decision, and the shifts from the nine-man court’s previous pronouncements on the issue, have been parsed and dissected with the zeal classics masters from my schooldays used to apply to the finer points of Greek grammar. And, it must be said, not without reason.
The crux of the debate is in the language of the amendment, second of the 10 that form America’s bill of rights, that noblest of charters of basic human rights, but also perhaps the most picked-over body of words on the planet.
It reads as follows: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” Try disentangling that one, and its idiosyncratic use of commas that would have appalled my classics master had the text been written in the language of Demosthenes. How exactly are the thoughts of statesmen of the late 18th century to be divined and applied to gun control in the first decade of the 21st? Previously, the court has upheld ownership of firearms as a collective right – in the context of those citizen militias who 220 years ago were a safeguard against any attempt by Britain to regain the colonies that had the cheek to fight for, and win, their independence.”
He goes on to blame George Bush for SCOTUS ruling in favor of individual Rights and hopes that Barack Obama will be elected and change the makeup of the court so this won’t happen in the future.
No wonder we kicked their asses out of our country more than two hundred years ago!
4 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
46 queries. 1.615 seconds.
Powered by WordPress with jd-desert theme design by John Doe.
1,509 spam killed by WP-SpamFree




![Validate my RSS feed [Valid RSS]](http://www.therealgunguys.com/images/valid-rss.png)

This is my comment. I usually ignore this stuff, but I had to play Tweak the Twit this time.
Mr. Cornwell, Obviously a dozen years here in the States haven’t been enough, because there are some things you still clearly don’t yet understand.
Here in America we date the beginning of the Revolution to 19April 1775. That’s not entirely true, although it is the date that the shooting started. The American Revolution began in January of 1629 with the dissolution of Parliament by Charles Stuart, when Oliver Cromwell and William Penn were both unknown gentry in the English countryside. It was this during this shared history that the Right to Arms became a Natural Right, that is, one that obtains regardless of any mention in any document. This is also true for our 1st and 4th Amendments, which are also pre-existent Rights.
This was and is a legal argument. Tossing in public policy issues is bad form, to say the least. But since you insist, how about you explain how it is that the areas in the USA with the highest per capita gun ownership rates also have the lowest crime rates?
Complain about this comment
Posted by Peter | 29.06.08, 00:39 GMT
Comment by Peter — June 28, 2008 #
The Twit Peter came to America about the time that Englishmen lost their firearm rights. I have talked with many of them who wish they had them back. If the multicults aren’t getting them, their own government is. England is basically gone - a few years after their rights to firearms.
Comment by Flanders Fields — June 29, 2008 #
“How exactly are the thoughts of statesmen of the late 18th century to be divined and applied to gun control in the first decade of the 21st?”
Pretty much the same way we extend freedom of speech to radio, television, and the internet. Of course, he may not understand this since UK libel laws basically gut free speech in England.
Comment by PN NJ — June 30, 2008 #
The only reason these British subjects pipe up is because they are bitter, for they have no guns or religion left to cling to. In fact, the Brits have nothing, for the sold it all for “feeling safe” and “accepted” by the Europeans.
Comment by Micheal — July 1, 2008 #