Over on TTAG’s Facebook page, Marc Johnson writes; “It should be noted the Supreme Court has handed down the most wide sweeping pro-2A Opinions in the history of the USA in the past few years. Often when they refuse to hear a case, it has nothing to do with the merits of the case itself, but with technicality issues that would render the case about some specific and non useful point, rather than the larger issue at hand.” Could be. The Supreme Court rarely explains its decision to hear or not hear a particular case. In this case, they offered no explanation. Regardless of their reasoning, yesterday’s decision has stirred-up strong feelings . . .
I’m so very disappointed in SCOTUS over the past 6 years, I’m losing faith in the country now. I want my country back!
Like many Americans, Facebooker Alan Ryan considers the Supremes’ Drake snub part of the government’s long march towards tyranny. Excessive taxation, burdensome regulation, bureaucratic bloat, militarized law enforcement, hidden surveillance, infringement on Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. It’s all much of a muchness, and none of it’s good.
In this dismay Mr. Ryan is not alone. What with the BLM showdown, New York’s SAFE Act making felons out of tens of thousands of previously legal gun owners, and the “assault weapon” and “high capacity magazine” ban in the Constitution State, anti-government pressure is building amongst The People of the Gun. And it’s not just them, either. TTAG commentator LJM heaves a weary sigh and takes it to the next [logical] step:
And so continues the perpetuation of the Two Americas, one that is infringed and the other not infringed.
A house divided…
Ellipses indeed. There’s a deep sense of foreboding surrounding the issue of gun rights at the moment. A sense that history is repeating itself. That pro and anti-gun states are growing further apart both politically and culturally. Because they are.
After the Sandy Hook slaughter, states home to small “c” conservative government started rolling back gun control laws. At the same time, states with a tyrannical or big government bent began turning the screws on their residents’ gun rights. New Jersey’s de facto ban on concealed carry – seemingly upheld by the Supreme Court – isn’t the only example. It’s not even a recent example. But it certainly throws this dangerous bifurcation into sharp relief.
That said, the conflict between the “Two Americas” is flying under the radar for most Americans: people busy trying to put food on their table and raise their children. And yet – I reckon it wouldn’t take much to escalate the conflict to a full-on inter-state Constitutional crisis. Although the Bundy Ranch confrontation was a fundamentally flawed example of anti-government fervor, it had a certain . . . inevitability to it. As Yeats pointed out, the center will not hold. Things fall apart.
Which is why I was hoping that the Supreme Court would take on Drake. If the Supreme Court had heard Drake, if they’d struck down the patently unconstitutional concept of “justifiable need” for concealed carry in New Jersey and elsewhere, if (and I’m dreaming here) they struck down the very idea of a government regulated firearms permitting system, that would have gone a long way towards easing people’s minds about over-reaching government, on the state and federal level.
We can’t load more than 11-rounds in our carry gun in Connecticut or buy a modern sporting rifle in New Jersey (and so on), but at least we have a right to keep and bear arms. We can reclaim the rest of our rights from there. Like that.
Note: I don’t believe that the Supreme Court’s rulings are the final word on the U.S. Constitution. IMHO the Court’s shameful history regarding slavery puts paid to that. Besides, the Constitution is a well-written and I can read well enough. Regardless of the conflict between natural law, Constitution law and law as she is practiced, I see the Supreme Court as a pressure valve. Its decisions can defuse seriously conflicting views, providing an “Oh well, let’s get on with it then” backdrop for their resolution.
Or not. Cough Civil War cough. Which raises the $64,000 question: is America headed for another state-based fracture? In some ways, in many ways, we’re already there. As for the possibility of a more violent conflict, that depends entirely on what happens with Uncle Sam.
If left alone, California, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey et al will eventually collapse under the weight of their own tyranny – as businesses and earners continue to flee to more congenial climes. If, however, Uncle Sam throws its weight behind these socialist enclaves, propping them up and attempting to extend their big government ethos into small government states, there will be hell to pay. States won’t rebel against each other. They rebel against the federal government.
Bottom line: the next federal election cycle and the one after that are more important to this country’s course than the Supreme Court’s rulings on gun rights. But it sure doesn’t seem that way, does it?