Equal Justice Under Law? Not If You Want to Exercise Your Second Amendment Rights

Supreme Court equal justice under law

Bigstock

By Theresa Inacker

From the Supreme Court’s website:

Equal Justice Under Law, these words written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. … As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

Guardian of the Constitution? Really?

After Monday’s colossal judicial fiasco in failing to act in any of ten Second Amendment cases, we have now been assured that the Court is not functioning as the guardian of the Constitution.

The Court has made clear that it is not the least bit interested in being the founding document’s guardian. It’s not even interested in resolving differing interpretations of the Constitution with major splits among the Circuit Courts when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms.

Instead of doing the hard work that it is tasked to do, the Court has decided to play in a popularity contest. While the Court grants only a small percentage of writs of certiorari (approximately  3%), Second Amendment challenges cry out for clarification and easily meet the criteria for the Court’s review. 

You must realize, We The People, ourselves, are the guardians of the Constitution and Republic.

In an impassioned dissent in the denial of cert for the New Jersey case Rogers v. Grewal, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the Court should have granted the petition and heard the case.

“Whatever one may think about the proper approach to analyzing Second Amendment cases, it is clearly time for us to resolve the issue.”

New Jersey gun owners were the force behind three of the ten pending Second Amendment cases, all challenging the state’s discriminatory “justifiable need” standard which operates as an effective ban on bearing arms.

The State of New Jersey has taken the dangerous position that the Second Amendment does not apply outside the home, except under extraordinary circumstances. While a denial of a petition for certiorari is not a binding, substantive decision on the merits, it has the full effect of continuing, permitting, maybe even blessing the violation of our civil rights as we still cannot obtain permits to carry outside the home.

The Court’s dereliction here shines like a neon sign, announcing that unconstitutional infringements against gun owners will be tolerated, and maybe even encouraged. It also signals that if, or when a case is taken, the Court is currently inclined to decide that the Second Amendment does not apply outside the home.

Every single gun owner in this country should be concerned with the posture of the current Court. Do you carry a firearm every day? Do you have carry permits issued by your state? Does your state have constitutional carry? All of those positions should be seen as precarious at best.

You should be concerned that a majority of the Court doesn’t agree that the Second Amendment applies outside the home. This means that your individual right is subject to the whims of mob rule, which is contrary to the concept of a Constitutional Republic.

Even non-gun owners should be concerned that the direct and plain words, “shall not be infringed” could somehow be interpreted any other way due to prevailing political influences. Wherever you may live, it may affect you, too one day.

If the Court will not acknowledge your right, who will? Today it’s New Jersey, but I assure you, this mob rule thinking against your individual civil rights spreads like a virus. There is no guardian. There is no firewall. What We The People will do about it remains to be seen.

 

Theresa Inacker, an attorney and Second Amendment advocate, is a member of the US Supreme Court bar, the New Jersey delegate to The DC Project, and serves as the Communications Director for the Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners.

comments

  1. avatar American Patriot says:

    There’s no such thing as equal justice…..Not when I can get a ticket for J-walking but not for rioting & shutting down an entire freeway. When they send SWAT because you opened your business when you are an unessential person but the police run away when their headquarters are overtaken by ANTIFA. Now “you” have to make your own JUSTICE!

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      American Patriot,

      Not only is there unequal justice under the law, we do not even have justice any more.

      Case in point: I know someone who filed late quarterly unemployment tax returns for their small (tiny) business. They owed something like $15 every quarter and would just file/pay them in a large batch every two years — happily paying the 20% penalty and interest on a total balance of $120. Then their state changed their law regarding late filing penalties and ended up assessing over $16,000 in late filing penalties for a tax liability of less than $200. The insane part: all three branches of state government — executive, legislative, and judicial — declared that fair and just and refused to reduce the penalties.

      Our nation abandoned justice a long time ago.

      1. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

        So… a business owner who “happily” flouts the deadlines? Makes me wonder about all the other rules they “happily” ignore for their own convenience… Probably a lot.
        TBH it sounds like those new penalties are working as intended. That business probably won’t ignore the payment they owe in the future.
        Point being, not a great example

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          A great example. The state was getting 20% on its money, everybody was doing fine, but the state *control* was at stake, get that sumbitch under control or kill him. Disgusting.

        2. avatar AgingDisgracefully says:

          Woof woof, little dog

        3. avatar CarlosT says:

          Oh, I’m sure the $15 check will get mailed to the jackboots on time now, so they can keep the trains running on time. But don’t count on getting any goodwill from someone you’ve charged 8,000% for minor non-compliance.

          I don’t know where this happened, but if it were me, consider me a no vote for every levy for the rest of time. I don’t care what it’s for. No.

        4. avatar Montana Actual says:

          Yea, they are working as intended. To keep your business taxed to a point you cannot afford to keep a business.

          Taxes, are fucking illegal.

        5. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Eric in Oregon,

          If you operated a small (tiny) business, you would understand. The business operator incurs a relatively huge penalty in lost productivity to figure out precisely how much tax they owe every three months. Say that takes four hours each time. The total lost productivity annually is 16 hours, for a total tax liability of roughly $120. That is gross. If that business operator can bill $60 per hour, then he/she loses $800 annually to file accurate returns and pay $120. But if he/she files inaccurate returns, now he/she faces possible felony perjury or tax-evasion charges. Better to spend about 8 hours once every two years and file in one large (and accurate) batch than to spend 32 hours every two years. That is until the penalties become ludicrous.

          Once again, we see that government has a tendency to kill business rather than facilitate business.

        6. avatar Debbie W. says:

          So eric you obviously enjoy seeing big government boots on the neck of a small business. The increased penalties that float your boat are what contribute to sinking a small business. So when you see an “Out Of Business Sign” in a strip mall, etc. chances are good the cost of doing business was too high thanks to ignorant azzhats like yourself.

        7. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

          Meh. Letting yourself be literally years behind in your obligations isn’t anything but laziness. Doing it intentionally is essentially fraud. If you guys are a fan of that kind of activity then enjoy.

        8. avatar Sean Michael Bearly says:

          You should change your online presence to Karen in Oregon. I’m sure there isn’t a law or regulation with which you disagree and you will be the first to let the local communist watchdogs know if anyone violates the letter of the law or regulation. You’re such a good little boy. And so proud of it.

        9. avatar Lugnut says:

          So we now have the opinion from a Dept. of Revenue obedient follower that has never heard of matching the proportionate penalty with he “crime”. I am sure your god of governemnt looks down favorably on you for at least the next 30 seconds.

      2. avatar Larry in Oregon says:

        Filing quarterly tax reports is incredibly easy. The state provides the software, all one has to do is login and plugin the names, SSNs, hours, and wages. The software does all the calculations and tells the employer the tax due. Everything can be done electronically, it will even copy employees from quarter to quarter with SSNs, so one would only need to provide hours and wages. If an employer truly does not have time to manage this part of their business they can hire a payroll company which will be more than happy to charge them for such an easy task. You know what happens when employers fail to file their reports on time? It costs everyone time and money. Someone files a claim and their wages aren’t there, their claim to receive benefits to feed their family is delayed while a claim specialist contacts the employer to verify the claimant worked for the employer, and what their wages and hours were for each quarter. If there are several people claiming under the same employer, this now multiplies how many government agents are required to work the claims. It could also trigger an audit that costs the employer more time and headache that they could have avoided by playing by the rules like every other employer. Who foots the bill for these negligent employers? The tax payers who pay the federal government to employ these government workers (state employment agencies are almost 100% federally funded).

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Larry in Oregon,

          At the time that the event happened, the state did not have software, did not calculate anything, and did not fill anything in any electronic form since there was no electronic form. The person filing the return had to determine everything and enter it on paper. Furthermore, there was an extremely complex calculation to determine the tax rate which was very difficult to understand and get correct — and changed every quarter.

          As for impacting employees, there was zero possible impact since the tiny business only had one employee, the owner, who was not eligible to request unemployment payments as the owner and only employee.

          Thus, the first failure was the state legislature concocting an incredibly difficult and expensive method of filing state unemployment tax returns. The second failure was the state not exempting tiny businesses (especially when the owner is the only employee and not even eligible for unemployment payments anyway). The third failure was all branches of state government insisting on ludicrous penalties that were arguably an oversight and, regardless, obviously unjust.

        2. avatar rt66paul says:

          Many small businesses are family affairs and are also seasonal. Most have the owner or spouse working a full time job outside the business. The business takes over everything. You act as if these people are really making money – most would do better working inside Corporate America – if they could get in past human resources. Corporations want round pegs to fill their holes, the small business owner has drive and tenacity to throw everything at it to survive. Paying a service to handle quarterly returns can still be very time consuming, just getting the info together every 13 weeks(taking valuable time from running the business).

        3. avatar Lugnut says:

          I don’t have the time, but would you mind inserting the word “bullshit” after each of your sentences?

        4. avatar Seentoomuch says:

          When are the people in this country ever going to wake up? When the government places a heavy tax burden on corporations and small businesses it is really taxing the customers. We pay those taxes through higher prices. We pay taxes on just about everything we do or purchase. The Democrats have perfected the class warfare in this country. They have fooled the people for years. President Lincoln said: You can fool all of the people some of the time and you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time. Well, the time is up America. It’s time to wake up.

    2. avatar PMinFl says:

      Trying to get in before the accountants and tax lawyers take over, if we gun owners represent 30% of the American populace then we’re able to claim minority status under the legal system. Why don’t we use this political leverage to forward legislation in our favor (as minorities)?….**.. just a thought….PM

      1. avatar American Patriot says:

        I already am the minority, being white, ex-military, freedom loving, Conservative, flag toting, 2A supporter w/no exceptions, County loving Patriot, working man that has never received Govt assistance.
        Now what else did I leave out…..But I know my voice won’t be heard, because I’m the enemy!

        1. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

          Well said. Also, sad but true.

        2. avatar Chris Robinette says:

          AMEN, brother

    3. avatar AC says:

      I really wish people would stop calling it a “2nd Amendment Right” because this then implies that our Right to keep and bear arms comes from the Constitution or from this amendment, and which translates into government providing us with this Right…and which is certainly NOT the case. Government can only grant privileges and privileges can and are subject to regulation, and which is exactly what the government wants. What we have that the Founding Fathers recognized and left for all of us under our Constitutional Republic is an inherent God given Right which is constitutionally protected under and by the provisions of the Second Amendment. And because amendments override and “supersede” everything that came before the amendment, it matters not what provisions or authority is claimed by government under the original document as the terms and conditions and the provisions of the amendment “supersede” and therefore must be what rules. This is basic contract law. If you want to change the new terms or conditions of an agreement after it has been amended then you must go through the process of amending the agreement again. And with respect to the Second Amendment, this has never been done and so “the Right to keep and bear arms Shall Not be infringed” remains as originally written and is The Supreme Law of the Land. Government lacks the lawful authority to regulate the firearms industry.

      1. avatar American Patriot says:

        Who mentioned anything about the 2nd Amend, not I. Beside I know what it means don’t need to be told!

      2. avatar North Woods says:

        It is Our “Unalienable Right to Keep and Bear Arms”…

  2. avatar Nanashi says:

    The Supreme Court’s denial of Qualified Immunity cases shows equal justice under the law isn’t a thing if you’re a cop or prosecutor, since they get to literally steal houses and get away with it.

    1. avatar M1Lou says:

      I just realized, after all of these years, your portrait is of Grunty from Jagged Alliance. What a fun game that was back in the day.

  3. avatar Ing says:

    “Do you carry a firearm every day? Do you have carry permits issued by your state? Does your state have constitutional carry? All of those positions should be seen as precarious at best.”

    In the state of WA, absolutely. The progs haven’t got around to screwing up our liberal concealed-carry licensing or the default legality of open carry — but given time, they will.

    1. avatar CarlosT says:

      It’s definitely in the crosshairs. There have been bills proposed, and I’m sure there will be an initiative sooner or later.

    2. avatar Montana Actual says:

      Well they can’t do it now… cuz warlord says so. They need more actually…

      1. avatar Ing says:

        That’s a point in the warlord’s favor, then.

        Tells you something about “progressive” Democrats, doesn’t it, when the warlord of an illegally seized urban territory has a better line on freedom than they do.

    3. avatar Nancy Hart says:

      The real question is what do people do when they live in communist states like New Jersey. “Just move” is not a solid solution, just a temporary one. An NJ court held that people in NJ “own guns at their own peril.” That peril is the boot of government on their necks.

  4. avatar Dennis says:

    People tearing down monuments and statues!? Those words on the FBI building should’ve been first!

    1. avatar Montana Actual says:

      I have argued this so many times. I’d love to fight oppression… if these idiots could figure out the real oppressors. Instead, they go for happy meal with a toy. I’m just trying to get the whole kitchen. So now we are forced to fight the ones in line for their free happy meals while the kitchen dishes out Surf n’ Turf to it’s reserved tables.

  5. avatar Jimmy Beam says:

    One gets the sense SCOTUS just doesn’t want to “rock the boat,” thinking that it’s rulings diffuse tensions and keep the general peace. One might even think they’re scared of taking a principled stand, for fear of setting off whatever progressive minority has the loudest megaphone at the moment. Maybe this is true in the short term, but like state legislatures and Congress, sooner or later they’ll need to stop kicking the can down the road and act. Someone is going to need to grow some balls and rule on these matters. The longer they leave it, the more the tension builds. We are seeing the effect of that today: grossly underfunded pension plans, the continuing subversion of our institutions, rights treated as second class, and out of control law enforcement that would far rather target law-abiding citizens than the real scumbags.

    1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

      “One might even think they’re scared of taking a principled stand, for fear of setting off whatever progressive minority has the loudest megaphone at the moment.”

      There may be something to that –

      If they ruled that AWBs, may-issue carry permits, etc, were unconstitutional, they could be screaming “Blood in the streets!” and increasing *their* voter turnout.

      There’s recent precedent for that. – Obama ramming his mandatory healthcare down our throats on the narrowest of margins motivated us to turn out in the midterm elections and retake the house, neutering his power. (Not to mention over 1,000 state houses, as well).

      Piss off the voters enough, and they will turn out like the 2010 election did for us…

  6. avatar NANCYLOVESDUMPY says:

    when they come for me…and they will(are). I am ready and let it be said – to hell and back we go – see ya at the fence line bois.

  7. avatar Ralph says:

    Equal justice under law = all mere citizens get equally screwed while the black-robed liars tell us that’s it’s for our own good.

    Anyone who has any faith in the so-called justice system is a fool. I didn’t have any faith in the system when I practiced law, and many of my brothers and sisters felt the same.

  8. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    We haven’t had a justice system for a very long time.
    We have a court system.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      It’s not a justice system but a legal system. A lawyer told me that a ling time ago.

      1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

        And the smart lawyers milk the ‘rules’ to their client’s advantage…

        1. avatar rt66paul says:

          And half of those lawyers work for the state.

  9. avatar Montana Actual says:

    “Even non-gun owners should be concerned that the direct and plain words, “shall not be infringed” could somehow be interpreted any other way due to prevailing political influences. Wherever you may live, it may affect you, too one day.”

    Non gun owners don’t care about the second amendment. If they did, they’d be gun owners. Even worse is the ones who utilize guns in any means, beit hunting, sport, or simply just having one, and they don’t understand the reason for the 2nd amendment. Half of them don’t even carry it or sometimes do, sometimes don’t. Those who consider people as “larpers”, or “playing dress up”, or militias and gatherings (now being labeled as counter protestors) to be some sort of extremism or immaturity are by far the biggest threat to gun owners, because they are within our ranks and will “Karen” us the first chance they get to collect some shillings or are threatened.

    Stop asking permission.
    Always carry.

    -Or if you prefer-

    Come and take them.
    Shall not be infringed.

    1. avatar Dave Pressey says:

      Some are learning it now, there are a ton of new gun owners and those that are having trouble getting them, that are just now realizing how difficult the citizens have allowed the government to make it so difficult.

    2. avatar Seentoomuch says:

      All of this rioting and looting we have going on in this country these days will educate a lot of people about the real meaning of the 2nd Amendment. Maybe some good can come out of all this chaos after all.

      1. avatar Montana Actual says:

        I’ll use an example from a bunch of local liberals:

        Love lives here in flathead valley states:
        Love Lives Here is very concerned that militia groups will now see this situation as a permission slip to “patrol” public events by claiming that people are coming to harm the veteran’s monument. We know that they’re looking for opportunities to promote the idea that they are protectors of the community and to recruit new members.

        Here are a couple of points we would like local residents to remember.
        1. Militia members are not an extension of law enforcement or a legitimate security group. They have no right to show up at an event and question the people who are attending.
        2. The right to bear arms does not give people the right to monitor other people’s First Amendment rights. We should reject any attempts to claim authority in the community.

        The Montana Human Rights Network released a strong statement about this situation this week.

        The Montana Human Rights Network is seriously concerned about the increased risk for violence by armed paramilitary militia activists who are showing up at otherwise peaceful protests in Montana and other rural communities, especially across the West.

        The nation, including Montana, is having a serious and challenging conversation about institutional racism, but paramilitaries are not the answer to police violence because they are not accountable to elected officials and community members.

        The Montana Human Rights Network has documented threats, intimidation and harassment by militia activists at racial justice protests around the state. Paramilitary militia activists are manipulating and controlling people’s right to assembly and speak with the threat of violence with firearms. These paramilitary militia activists were not asked by law enforcement or racial justice protesters to come to events armed. These militia mobs are using these events as training and recruitment opportunities.

        In the situations they are creating the threat of violence is real. If one person gets offended and they have their finger on the trigger it could go very badly quickly. Inclusive democracy doesn’t happen at the barrel of a gun.

        Our local and state leaders need to publicly reject the presence of armed paramilitaries at peaceful anti-racist protests held in their communities.

        We don’t want to get into a battle over Second Amendment rights with these folks because we know they’re itching for that fight. However, they do not have the right to use their First and Second Amendment rights to control other people’s freedom of expression.

        ACTION ITEM!
        Please contact your elected officials and let them know that you do not want a militia presence normalized for events at Depot Park or in the Flathead Valley.

        When local residents and visitors see armed activists in the downtown area, they assume that Kalispell is not a welcoming, accepting place. That’s bad for public safety and for business

        So just to clarify, their movement will ALWAYS target the second amendment and gun owners. Yes, some people are seeing the value in self defense, but most people are NOT affected by the rioting and looting so they still push their agenda. The threat is very much still real and will continue to grow.

        Also, most people who showed up armed at the couple protests I have been to since this all kicked off, are NOT “militia” members or anything close to it. They are simply people who don’t believe the race baiting cause they are pushing, or the commie infringements on Americans way of living. In fact, discussions with a lot of people proved this to me. The fact is, these people pushing their movement don’t want a discussion, and they don’t care what you think or why you are there. If you disagree with them in ANY way, you are a threat and they will exhaust all resources to exterminate you. Too much feels, not enough forward thinking.

        1. avatar Seentoomuch says:

          It’s a lot more simple than that. When civilized society breaks down into lawless mobs roaming the streets and threatening the individual citizen, then it is time for that individual citizen to arm him or her self. When lawful authorities can no longer protect you, it is your duty to yourself and your loved ones to do whatever it takes to protect your own lives. When written laws are no longer enforced, the gun becomes law.

  10. avatar Hannibal says:

    Thomas has stepped up impressively in the past few years.

    But no one else has.

    Refusing to grant cert because Roberts may be squishy is just another excuse. At this point refusing to hear cases is just as bad as an adverse ruling. If you’re in a ‘good’ state an adverse ruling would not matter; if you’re in a bad state, you’re already living under the regime as if it had already been made.

    1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

      “At this point refusing to hear cases is just as bad as an adverse ruling.”

      Disagree – Overturning a SCOTUS decision is magnitudes more difficult than overturning a lower court.

      Why make our work vastly more difficult than it needs to be?

  11. avatar M1Lou says:

    The constitution really isn’t hard.

    1a. Congress shall make no law…- Yet there are quite a few laws on this.

    2a. …shall not be infringed- Yet there are quite a few laws that do just that.

    We also have the Federalist Papers, which I read again this year, and other writing of the founders that describe exactly what they meant. It’s not diving to understand the rights of the people. It isn’t hard to figure out what terms meant. It is just hard to get people who are drunk on power to follow the damn rules that were set out to restrain them.

  12. avatar Debbie W. says:

    Think the USSC is disgusting now think how it would be if the POTUS was a democRat like hilliary rotten clintoon or Jim Crow Gun Control Joe Biden. And that nightmare may not be an impossibility thanks to forum propagandists who talk guns for the sole purpose of getting around to bashing President Donald John Trump. And then you have forum bigots who hear of a crime and trip over each other to be the first to denigrate the perp’s ethnicity…that is after it’s confirmed the perp doesn’t look like them.
    As far as I am concerned if you do not back the POTUS 100% and/or if you are a bigot in any shape or form you can go play in the freeway.

    TRUMP/PENCE 2020.

    1. avatar Montana Actual says:

      Geez… give it rest already, crazy cat lady.

    2. avatar Midwest Conservative says:

      Ethnicity means nothing to me, I don’t give a rat’s ass what color your skin is , I don’t care what religion( if any) you follow . It’s your actions that make me like or dislike anyone. I have black friends, brown friends, white friends. All of my friends like guns , I dislike anti gunners. I will denigrate the perps for their actions. STUPID ACTIONS LIKE FIGHTING POLICE , STEALING TASERS AND FIRING IT AT THE COPS. If you think the country owes you for something that took place over a century ago, I have no use for you. I have worked my ass off for the past 43 years to get what I have (not much). I am not giving anything in reparations for actions that took place more than a century befor I was born.

  13. avatar Bob Wyman says:

    An article written by an attorney? Attorney’s are a part of your problems friends.
    Everyone one of you is all for the War on Drugs because you are law-abiding gun owners. Am I right? Of course. But your drug laws are the at the forefront of law enforcements short to-do list. The police say they need more “tools” for this war and you all hate junkies so much you tell police to take whatever tools they need. Those tools they want are always restrictions on Rights and more laws with additions in small print -yet drugs are still everywhere and the 2nd Amendment is still there unchanged. GOA etc are still asking for your money and maybe you pony it up but they don’t spend it on The Bill of Rights because the problems happen in your state. Your state laws overrides most laws the federal government has except if a federal crime is committed>
    Your governors have added so many restrictions on firearm ownership you can hardly keep up with the changes but the changes come because you let em. The 2nd is nothing. You can keep and bear arms but the state says who and where. It is close to the point you can keep em at home and nowhere else without a permit and/or they are dismantled. State’s Rights. Have you read your state’s constitution? Have you organized and marched and written letters to your reps at the statehouse or just bellyache on these forums?
    If I were you I would stop calling that court “Supreme” and give it no respect and all courts below it as well.. Next up on the chopping block would be the lawyers and finally the spineless who beg for law and order. Find out where police departments come from and why does the sheriff who is elected seem to be left out. And the FBI gets involved where they do not belong because everyone thinks they are TV stars. Your state is your problem….

    1. avatar Midwest Conservative says:

      My state has the right to bear arms in the state constitution. The last two governors have expanded gun rights and hunting opportunities. Six years ago I got my lifetime permit. As long as I get no felonies my permit is good.

  14. avatar HP says:

    Look at what Roberts did with DACA. Now did we really want a 2A case to go forward with him as the tie breaker?

    1. avatar Grim Reaper says:

      Darth Bader Ginsberg can’t last much longer. She has looked like a corpse for a long time now. She can’t even sit up in a chair. I ‘ll take October 12 in the Dead Pool.

      1. avatar American Patriot says:

        Why do you think they won’t let anyone take her pulse!!!!

  15. avatar The Olympic Snorch says:

    The mindless tribalism of the shooting public has come around to bite it in the butt. Your issues are not that important on the national level, now. Boo hoo. What goes around comes around. Most of you have had decades as adults to realize that you don’t need LGBT people to suffer to enjoy your own lives, or to realize that your boot-licking puts less privileged people in a bad spot. You didn’t do that, you wanted it all, you petty, leeching trash. This is what you get.

    1. avatar Common sense says:

      Get out of your grandma’s basement, get a job , and an education. Its obvious you need all three .

    2. avatar Montana Actual says:

      Yea? Come and take them.

  16. avatar Peter Gunn says:

    Yesterday, I visited a local city park that I have passed by many times since moving to Jacksonville, FL in 1970- but had never set foot in. The park is located in historic Springfield- Jacksonville’s oldest neighborhood and former center of culture, wealth, and tourism back in the 1880’s. Starting in the early 1960’s, though, Springfield began a decline that resulted in the district being less than favorable to prudent tourism. By the early 1970’s…one just didn’t go there. The roots of its former glory can still be felt there today, though, and it remains an oddly bucolic patch smack in the middle of apathetic urban decay and profligate crime.

    https://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2009-apr-urban-parks-confederate-park

    I was ruminating on the day’s experience before falling asleep last night, when my thoughts coalesced into what I found to be eminently compelling parallels. Remember, this is only a thought exercise…

    Imagine it’s 159 years from now in a possible future. You are actively engaged in discourse not dissimilar to what we have here on TTAG. The subject of today’s discourse is the reasons for America’s Second Civil War. The disaccord among participants revolves around support for and against the eventual result of the conflict- the repeal of the Second Amendment.

    The bickering advances two counter propositions- both based on constitutional interpretation. Those arguing in support of the “winning” side maintain that the Second Amendment had long been misinterpreted and deserved to be repealed, while those devoted to the “losing” side maintain that the Second Amendment was an individual right conferred by the Constitution. There are zealots on both sides of the discussion, and the sparring is merciless. Ardent “loser” backers steadfastly advocate the incontrovertible righteousness of the Constitution as originally written. Devout disciples of the “winners” viciously denounce the losers as traitors.

    The parallels are palpable. It was 159 years ago that a civil war erupted over constitutional interpretation. And here we find ourselves in a remarkably analogous predicament. I am intrigued by the concurrency of events, as well as bewildered by the equivalency. It leaves me pondering… how would you assay the future’s perception of your declared stance regarding our current events?

    Thought provoking, ain’t it?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email