SAF and Alan Gottlieb thoughts on SCOTUS pick - The Firearms Forum

Marlin · 05-27-2009, 11:07 AM

Barack Obama has Nominated a ANTI-GUN RIGHTS Judge for the Supreme Court --

Select Below to Tell the Senate to REJECT Sonia Sotomayor:
https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471

Second Amendment Supporter,

President Barack Obama has picked his nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court...

...And it's a "slap in the face" at gun rights and the Second Amendment!

Can we STOP the nomination of the pro-gun control judicial activist Judge Sonia Sotomayor? YES -- but only if YOU join your voice with hundreds of thousands of others, demanding she be rejected!

SEND YOUR BLAST FAXES NOW TO EVERY SINGLE
U.S. SENATOR, DEMANDING THEY REJECT THE
ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT JUDGE SOTOMAYOR!
https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471

You see, we already know how this nominee would rule on Second Amendment rights: she doesn't believe we HAVE any!

Judge Sotomayor, a New York native, ruled on a Second Circuit Appeals Court panel that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo. This ruling is in direct conflict with a Ninth Circuit Court ruling in the Nordyke v. King case in California, that the Second Amendment IS incorporated through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

So what does it mean, that Obama now nominated Sotomayor to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court? It means that any progress we've been making lately... WILL BE REVERSED.

While Democrats in Congress have been making great strides in the gun rights arena, refusing to consider a renewal of the Clinton gun ban, and offering overwhelming bipartisan support for legislation allowing citizens to carry firearms in national parks... President Obama just demonstrated that he prefers judges who OPPOSE Second Amendment rights.

The Supreme Court may take up this issue of incorporation during its next session beginning in October, because attorneys in the Maloney case plan to appeal in late June.

So, JUDGE Sotomayor ruled against our Second Amendment gun rights in Maloney v. Cuomo. If the Maloney appeal is accepted by the Supreme Court... would JUSTICE Sotomayor recuse herself from deliberations?

It's doubtful a judicial activist would ever do that!

[These emphases are added by Marlin]

SEND YOUR BLAST FAXES NOW TO EVERY SINGLE
U.S. SENATOR, DEMANDING THEY REJECT THE
ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT JUDGE SOTOMAYOR!
https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471

Judge Sotomayor has also written an opinion that declined to order the release of certain information under the Freedom of Information Act. In one case, according to SCOTUSblog, she wrote that the "unwarranted invasion of privacy" for individuals whose names would be release under an FOIA request outweighed the public interest.

So, JUDGE Sotomayor seemed to rule to protect privacy rights...Would JUSTICE Sotomayor be just as protective of the privacy rights of concealed carry permit holders if a newspaper wanted to publish that information? Or is it more likely that an anti-Second Amendment judicial activist like Sotomayor would reject our privacy rights, in the interest of "protecting the public"?

What do YOU think?

We need to make sure that during the upcoming Senate confirmation hearings, someone asks about her positions on incorporation and the privacy rights of gun owners. Every single one of these Senators need to be told by the American people that the Second Amendment needs to be expanded, not slashed down even more!

We need to FIGHT this nomination in the U.S. Senate -- so we've set up our Blast Fax system to do just that!

SEND YOUR BLAST FAXES NOW TO EVERY SINGLE
U.S. SENATOR, DEMANDING THEY REJECT THE
ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT JUDGE SOTOMAYOR!
https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471

Please, take action right away to STOP this anti-Second Amendment judicial activist from being confirmed to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court!

Sincerely yours,

Alan M. Gottlieb
Second Amendment Foundation

P.S. We need YOUR help to preserve and protect our Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Please select here to make your tax-deductible contribution now!

This is one of the most important Supreme Court battles of our lifetime. We need ALL FORTY Republican Senators voting against her -- PLUS at least a few more Democrats, to prevent her from ascending to the highest court in the land, and imposing her anti-gun rights judicial activist philosophy on America for the rest of her life!

SEND YOUR BLAST FAXES NOW TO EVERY SINGLE
U.S. SENATOR, DEMANDING THEY REJECT THE
ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT JUDGE SOTOMAYOR!
https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471

Send Checks To:

Second Amendment Foundation
James Madison Building
Dept Code 2471
12500 NE 10th Place
Bellevue, WA 98005

alhefner · 05-27-2009, 12:21 PM

So, I read the PDF of the court of appeals decision and a few things strike me as....well...STUPID.

First, the decisions plainly states the opinion that the Second Amendment does not apply to the laws of an individual state but only restricts the actions of the federal government. Then they go on to state that the Heller case does not have any bearing on this case.

If I am not mistaken, the Heller case did affirm the right of the individual to keep and bear arms and struck down the D.C. ban on that basis. An individual resides within the borders of a state usually. The exceptions are territories and the District of Columbia. If the Heller decision does not affirm the right of individuals residing within the borders of a "state" but only those who live in the territories or the District of Columbia, the the ruling is preferential and discriminatory at the very least.

Secondly, the court said there was a clear and rational basis for the law itself. The law makes it illegal to have these devices on the presumption that they are used primarily as weapons and are easy to learn the use of them.

So, friggn what?! Ok, why would someone want a weapon, this weapon, in the home? It is very possible that a non-firearm weapon is all they are allowed to have as some sort of self defense. It is very possible that the person is simply a weapons enthusiast or as in this case a martial artist. It is very possible that a device that fits the description in the law could actually be some sort of tie-down device used to secure cargo loads.

Are the idiot legislators of New York ready to follow the example of England and ban or regulate EVERYTHING that COULD be used as a weapon?!

The new nominee for the Supreme Court went along with the appeals court decision. That make her a hater of freedom in my mind.

05-27-2009, 11:07 AM	#1
Marlin TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: At SouthernMoss' side forever! Contributor Posts: 13,853	SAF and Alan Gottlieb thoughts on SCOTUS pick Barack Obama has Nominated a ANTI-GUN RIGHTS Judge for the Supreme Court -- Select Below to Tell the Senate to REJECT Sonia Sotomayor: https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471 Second Amendment Supporter, President Barack Obama has picked his nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court... ...And it's a "slap in the face" at gun rights and the Second Amendment! Can we STOP the nomination of the pro-gun control judicial activist Judge Sonia Sotomayor? YES -- but only if YOU join your voice with hundreds of thousands of others, demanding she be rejected! SEND YOUR BLAST FAXES NOW TO EVERY SINGLE U.S. SENATOR, DEMANDING THEY REJECT THE ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT JUDGE SOTOMAYOR! https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471 You see, we already know how this nominee would rule on Second Amendment rights: she doesn't believe we HAVE any! Judge Sotomayor, a New York native, ruled on a Second Circuit Appeals Court panel that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo. This ruling is in direct conflict with a Ninth Circuit Court ruling in the Nordyke v. King case in California, that the Second Amendment IS incorporated through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. So what does it mean, that Obama now nominated Sotomayor to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court? It means that any progress we've been making lately... WILL BE REVERSED. While Democrats in Congress have been making great strides in the gun rights arena, refusing to consider a renewal of the Clinton gun ban, and offering overwhelming bipartisan support for legislation allowing citizens to carry firearms in national parks... President Obama just demonstrated that he prefers judges who OPPOSE Second Amendment rights. The Supreme Court may take up this issue of incorporation during its next session beginning in October, because attorneys in the Maloney case plan to appeal in late June. So, JUDGE Sotomayor ruled against our Second Amendment gun rights in Maloney v. Cuomo. If the Maloney appeal is accepted by the Supreme Court... would JUSTICE Sotomayor recuse herself from deliberations? It's doubtful a judicial activist would ever do that! [These emphases are added by Marlin] SEND YOUR BLAST FAXES NOW TO EVERY SINGLE U.S. SENATOR, DEMANDING THEY REJECT THE ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT JUDGE SOTOMAYOR! https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471 Judge Sotomayor has also written an opinion that declined to order the release of certain information under the Freedom of Information Act. In one case, according to SCOTUSblog, she wrote that the "unwarranted invasion of privacy" for individuals whose names would be release under an FOIA request outweighed the public interest. So, JUDGE Sotomayor seemed to rule to protect privacy rights...Would JUSTICE Sotomayor be just as protective of the privacy rights of concealed carry permit holders if a newspaper wanted to publish that information? Or is it more likely that an anti-Second Amendment judicial activist like Sotomayor would reject our privacy rights, in the interest of "protecting the public"? What do YOU think? We need to make sure that during the upcoming Senate confirmation hearings, someone asks about her positions on incorporation and the privacy rights of gun owners. Every single one of these Senators need to be told by the American people that the Second Amendment needs to be expanded, not slashed down even more! We need to FIGHT this nomination in the U.S. Senate -- so we've set up our Blast Fax system to do just that! SEND YOUR BLAST FAXES NOW TO EVERY SINGLE U.S. SENATOR, DEMANDING THEY REJECT THE ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT JUDGE SOTOMAYOR! https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471 Please, take action right away to STOP this anti-Second Amendment judicial activist from being confirmed to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court! Sincerely yours, Alan M. Gottlieb Second Amendment Foundation P.S. We need YOUR help to preserve and protect our Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Please select here to make your tax-deductible contribution now! This is one of the most important Supreme Court battles of our lifetime. We need ALL FORTY Republican Senators voting against her -- PLUS at least a few more Democrats, to prevent her from ascending to the highest court in the land, and imposing her anti-gun rights judicial activist philosophy on America for the rest of her life! SEND YOUR BLAST FAXES NOW TO EVERY SINGLE U.S. SENATOR, DEMANDING THEY REJECT THE ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT JUDGE SOTOMAYOR! https://secure.conservativedonations.com/saf_sotomayor_dc/?a=2471 Send Checks To: Second Amendment Foundation James Madison Building Dept Code 2471 12500 NE 10th Place Bellevue, WA 98005 __________________ *The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing.* *The only criminal class native to the United States is Congress.* -->

05-27-2009, 12:21 PM	#2
alhefner V.I.P. Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Reno, NV Posts: 205	Re: SAF and Alan Gottlieb thoughts on SCOTUS pick So, I read the PDF of the court of appeals decision and a few things strike me as....well...STUPID. First, the decisions plainly states the opinion that the Second Amendment does not apply to the laws of an individual state but only restricts the actions of the federal government. Then they go on to state that the Heller case does not have any bearing on this case. If I am not mistaken, the Heller case did affirm the right of the individual to keep and bear arms and struck down the D.C. ban on that basis. An individual resides within the borders of a state usually. The exceptions are territories and the District of Columbia. If the Heller decision does not affirm the right of individuals residing within the borders of a "state" but only those who live in the territories or the District of Columbia, the the ruling is preferential and discriminatory at the very least. Secondly, the court said there was a clear and rational basis for the law itself. The law makes it illegal to have these devices on the presumption that they are used primarily as weapons and are easy to learn the use of them. So, friggn what?! Ok, why would someone want a weapon, this weapon, in the home? It is very possible that a non-firearm weapon is all they are allowed to have as some sort of self defense. It is very possible that the person is simply a weapons enthusiast or as in this case a martial artist. It is very possible that a device that fits the description in the law could actually be some sort of tie-down device used to secure cargo loads. Are the idiot legislators of New York ready to follow the example of England and ban or regulate EVERYTHING that COULD be used as a weapon?! The new nominee for the Supreme Court went along with the appeals court decision. That make her a hater of freedom in my mind. __________________ I hunt with a camera! - my outdoor blog Fighting "Gun Crime" by focusing on the criminal