Reading this article, about the overwhelming tendency of state attorneys general (31 pro-rights to 5 against, with the other 14 staying out of it) to view the right of the people protected by the Second Amendment as a (whaddya know?) . . . right of the people, I was struck by the Brady Bunch's Dennis Henigan's explanation for the one-sided alignment:
Politics also factors heavily into D.C. v. Heller, according to Henigan.It's like this, Dennis--the U.S. is still ostensibly a republic, whose governing officials are supposedly in office to uphold the will of the people. Like your ideological ally Ronald Safer, you don't have to like the fact that nearly three quarters of Americans believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right, but you oughtn't be surprised that elected officials (most of whom, presumably, would like to be reelected) have noticed the public's belief in rights, and comport themselves accordingly.
He said some state attorneys general - who are elected in 43 states - likely sided with Heller as a way to show constituents they support an individual-rights reading of the Second Amendment, even as they seek to preserve their own state statutes regulating guns.
"These are political actors. They don't want to appear to be endorsing a handgun ban," Henigan said.
Dennis, readers will remember, prefers to ignore that "of the people" part of the Second Amendment. Apparently, Dennis, Americans aren't buying your lies about what the Second Amendment says.
0 comments:
Post a Comment