U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- When they write the accounts of how the battle for the Second Amendment was decided, it’s not just going to be about the court rulings. It’s also going to focus on whether those court rulings took hold, or if they got overturned down the road.
Yes, folks, the Supreme Court has been known to change its mind. In 58 years, the Supreme Court changed its mind on the legality of “separate but equal.” While Brown v. Board of Education overturning Plessy v. Ferguson was a good change, it is also a warning with regards to the Heller and McDonald rulings.
Both of those rulings were 5-4 rulings in support of the Second Amendment. But even then, it was difficult. We know now that during the Heller deliberations, then-Justice John Paul Stevens was working to water down that landmark decision, if not thwart it completely. To an extent, he succeeded in getting some throwaway lines, but those lines have been used to justify semi-auto bans by the Ninth and Fourth Circuits. So, the Supreme Court situation, while better, is still precarious. This doesn’t include calls on the Left to pack the court.
Now, carrying out such a packing is theoretically possible. There is nothing in the Constitution limiting the Supreme Court to only nine members. But to do that, there would need to be an anti-Second Amendment majority in the House, an anti-Second Amendment supermajority in the Senate, and an anti-Second Amendment President.
The first of those three requirements are already in place. The other two could very well happen by 2025. You can bet that the packing would be designed to neutralize pro-Second Amendment appointments since January 2017. Imagine, if you will, multiple new justices with the John Paul Stevens mindset on the Second Amendment, and also willing to rule in favor of laws that restrict political speech.
These would not be mere setbacks for Second Amendment supporters, these would be kill shots. Not only would a radical and onerous agenda be passed, but efforts to campaign against it could be effectively criminalized. How do we stop this?
The answer is to win elections, and right now, while Second Amendment supporters dominate in the rural areas – especially “flyover country” – they have steadily lost ground in the suburbs. As such, Bloomberg, Schumer, Feinstein, and others who seek to take away our Second Amendment rights for no good reason are closer to being able to say, “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them in.”
Why is this the case? Well, one of the reasons has been the incessant coverage mass shootings have gained. Now, we know the facts about mass shootings, how they are rare events, that “gun-free” zones are prime locations for such events, that concealed carry helps stop them, that other countries have worse ones than the United States, and often there are numerous missed chances to prevent them long before the terrible event happens.
That’s not the picture that the media and anti-Second Amendment extremists have painted. Bloomberg has helped make that false picture stick, especially in the minds of the proverbial “soccer moms” – suburban women, usually who were also balancing their kids with careers. These women, who place the safety of their kids as a top priority, have been hit with years of claims that the NRA is a threat to their kids’ safety because of its defense of the Second Amendment.
Sadly, the NRA’s response hasn’t been as effective as it could have been. In addition, the social stigmatization of the Second Amendment has, as its purpose, to make the suburbs a bastion for Bloomberg’s agenda. The fact is, Second Amendment supporters will need ways to convince a bunch of soccer moms who have the poop scared out of them that they have been lied to. How can we do this?
The first step has to be some very smart advertising. Yes, Silicon Valley and the national media are biased, but local stations sell ad revenue, too. Run ads that get the facts out, show demonstrable lies by those who wish to take our rights away, and which humanize Second Amendment supporters. In addition, many of the techniques used to fight the social stigmatization of the Second Amendment can be used.
We can talk about the attack on our rights, and yes, fire up those in flyover country, but it is in the suburbs where the future of our Second Amendment rights will be decided.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.
Out gunned and out numbered. And drugs are epidemic and dealers are teaming up with pimps who kidnap children and traffick captive women. In Maine the trafficking is a 32 billion dollars hole in Maine’s economy.
In recent elections the candidates were so closely tied they had to use ranked choice voting, which l don’t like because I to the polls to vote for a particular candidate and nobody else.
Congress needs to mandate that all decisions coming down from the US Supreme Court be voted unanimously by the justices. This will assure that only constitutionalists may be seated on the court and there will be no cabal of liberals or statists.
Criminals don’t abide by the laws so how do stiffer gun restrictions help ? The new laws only effect people who follow the law. Don’t be stupid do research and find out the truth. None of the new laws do anything to protect anyone we already have background checks the politicians have there own agenda in mind not the safety of the people look at the FBI’S own data from the last assult weapon ban it did nothing to gun crime. My God just look at all the lies you see in the news everyday about all the scandals in… Read more »
The Second Amendment does not guarantee the right to keep and bear arms. The Bill of Rights is a contract between the government and the governed that inalienable rights (endowed by the Creator) will not be infringed upon. That knowledge is being eroded in our current society. Unfortunately, it will not stop, rather continue. The progressive agenda is just that insidious. The sheeple will not realize they have sold themselves into slavery and abject poverty until it’s too late. We can stem the tide, but the post modern flood waves will continue to crash against our constitution. I fear for… Read more »
Was told once you have to lay down to be walked on.Its past time to stand up or we won’t be able to stand.We need verifiable facts to put in the face of these gun right grabbers .
Cox and LaPierre have devolved the NRA into a mega self, perpetuating fundraising organization like AARP . I dropped my membership( which started with Obama’s election) when they started spending more to raise money than my membership cost. Then they started giving away the store. And LTC North (WTF)? I now belong to Judicial Watch and SAF. THEY ARE ACTUALLY DOING THINGS.
NRA started to setup standardization and expansion of civilian firearms training. Setting standards and instruction on being an instructor in the various types of shooting and firearms. Instead of getting into the political realm of firearms, the NRA probably should have stayed where it was originally started for, training civilians. And let others like NAGR, 2nd amend foundation, GOA, take on the political part.
Article One Section Eight of the Constitution grants Congress the power to regulate and call forward the local milita to enforce the laws of Union, among other things It is this portion of the Constitution that the Second Amendment was intended to amend. The older I get, the more convinced I become that modern day Law Enforcement is one of many subdivisions within the original meaning of the word milita and that the individual’s right to self preservation from congress’s regulatory powers over the local milita. Meaning the individual’s right to self preservation out weighs the same rights of an… Read more »
The Second Amendment is grossly misunderstood and must be repealed, updated, and partially reissued.
The most important issue that must be addressed is that there is absolutely no compelling need for civilian ownership of assault weapons.
Right! because eveyone knows it’s better if you’re stabbed, dismembered with a machete, or bludgeoned, than shot.