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.
The problem is those idiots like Feinstein and other people just like them in my opinion should be kicked out of the United States if they want this country like the others that have taken the rites of honest people to defend there selfs and depend on a government that won’t even help the veterans that have defended this country with there lives and limbs they have lost then go there infact now everyone should know why they have armed guards protecting them! They are stupid and power hungry to own everyone and everything once and if that takes place… Read more »
To change someone’s mind you need to personalize the situation. Many women say that they could never shoot someone. When you ask if that would be their answer if someone were threatening their children the answer changes. And yet when someone threatens the mother, or father, are they not also, by extension, threatening the children? The problem is that most people spend or have spent very little time in their life contemplating life itself. There was a very good add in the Oklahoma Governor’s race this year talking about the Democrat candidate’s stance on the age to buy a AR-15.… Read more »
There are 300 million firearms in possession of the citizens of the United States and the only thing that really makes any other safe or well trained police departments gun reform it’s time has come
I’ve been saying for years that the future of the second amendment isn’t going to be fought in the courts, it’s a PR war. We all know we will never convince the anti-gunners and the Pro-gun people are already on our side. The fight is over the non gun owners who respect the second amendment but don’t have any skin in the game. They see the if it bleeds it leads stories and the gun control groups conflate the statistics to tell them that this is an epidemic, and all they need to do is some common sense gun legislations,… Read more »
The NRA has, indeed not been perfect throughout it’s long history at helping to preserve a right that should never be in question in the first place. The government doesn’t give us our rights, on the contrary, the only thing they can do in regard to our rights is to take them away (in the intentional misnomer if safety, security, health, well being, etc.). But we give them permission every time we don’t vote or dont pay attention to the issues at hand or just general apathy. Most people have too much on their plate already, juggling career, family, etc.… Read more »
“Sadly, the NRA’s response hasn’t been as effective as it could have been.” You don’t say,Negotiating Rights Away has been one of capitulation from the start,1934, down the road to Infringement and continues today under La Pierre and Cox. Capitulation success of Negotiating Rights Away since 1934 History 1791: The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is ratified. The amendment reads: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” After That 1871: The National Rifle Association was formed by Union Army… Read more »