Poll: The Next 2A Supreme Court Case

AK-74There have been several Supreme Court events pertaining to the Second Amendment during the past year.

In June, the Supreme Court ruled in a 6-2 vote that domestic abusers convicted of misdemeanors can be barred from owning firearms.

The Court also refused to hear a challenge to the Connecticut “assault” weapons ban that outlaws many popular semi-automatic rifles, in effect allowing the ban to stand.

This year the Court also overturned a Massachusetts decision that determined that stun guns were not covered by the Second Amendment, siding instead with a woman who said she carried one as protection against an abusive former boyfriend.

In recent years, we’ve also seen Supreme Court victories such as Heller and MacDonald, so the Court’s Second Amendment record has been somewhat mixed.

Given what we know, which Second Amendment case would you like to see the Supreme Court take on next? Do you trust it to impartially rule on any gun-related issue?



10 thoughts on “Poll: The Next 2A Supreme Court Case”

  1. Actually, DO trust the Nine Nazgul, and my trust is well placed. I trust them to incrementally render government promises to not traduce any or all of my inherent rights meaningless. They are there for one thing, only: To keep the “Law of the Jungle” at bay long enough for the elites to bleed us into unconsciousness and then feast upon our flesh.

  2. I have pretty much lost faith in and respect for the legislative, judicial and executive branches in both Federal and State Governments when it concerns protecting, following and respecting the Constitution and Bill of Rights. To me they serve only their own interests.

    Hillary will definitely pick activist judges from the left. Thats a given and down right frightening. But republicans don’t always have a good track record when it comes to picking Supreme Court Judges. Think Earl Warren, among a few others.

  3. Given the choice of answers, it’s really two questions in one: a: Do you trust the Supreme Court? and b: For those of you that do, which one would you like it to rule on first?

    I’d be curious as to the answers to a slightly different question: “Given a Supreme Court with integrity, which would you like them to take on first?” It’d be interesting to see peoples’ priorities given the opportunity to pick one thing and make it right.

    Of course, a Supreme Court with integrity would simply use the first 2A case that came its way to toss as much as it could, even if not directly related. If the question were “carry” every prohibition against bearing, either concealed or open carry (including those that make exceptions for licenses) would get tossed, even if the case concerned concealed carry. And any prohibition on keeping arms might get tossed if an “Assault Weapon” ban came before it.

  4. A court with integrity would not have given us Dred Scott (slavery), Wickard v Filburn (interstate commerce), Korematsu v. United States (internment camps), Roe v Wade (abortion), Kelo v New London (eminent domain), and a host of other decisions. At this point the only hope we have is the States and other entities using nullification to take their power back. The spineless hacks in the national government and the Statists on both left and right will never do it.

  5. Every time the supreme court meets they seem to have their own little ole constitutional convention.

    IMHO if they can make everything up as they go truly they prove without a doubt that we are ruled by man and women and not by law.

    No matter what the supreme’s decide they can never over rule natural law, but it is up to “we the people” which is mentioned first & foremost in our constitution to maintain this or any constitution if this or any constitution has any way of being THE law.

    Or instead we the people can just all watch the NFL and be happy.

    …There is this little song I wrote
    I hope you learn it note for note
    Like good little children
    Don’t worry, be happy….

    Bob Marley

    1. Or instead we the people can just all watch the NFL and be happy.

      Until or unless the wrong team wins. Hell, sometimes even if the right team wins, there can be a celebratory riot. But that’s okay, it’s another excuse to grab guns. (/sarc)

  6. I am not sure when it happened but the so called Supreme court has become partisan. That was never the founding fathers intent, and that was why they were appointed for life. To be free from the political winds of change that blew from different directions, which could threaten to divide a partisan court. Unfortunately, since about the time of the Bork nomination, the political nature has invaded the court and so now I don’t see any way out of it.

    1. The Bork nomination was the last intelligent conversation had in that building. And it was the last time anybody will ever here the words “Natural Law” uttered in a positive or thoughtful manner as well.

Leave a Reply

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