There is one big difference. With gay marrriage it was the courts saying you had to allow it. A SC ruling that the government has the right to regulate arms just throws it back to a local decision, which is pretty much the status quo.

 

Could the Reps not push for a constitutional amendment defining the right for an individual owner to have a gun?

How would any SC decision be a rallying point for Republicans? Conservatives own this court. SEVEN of the nine justices are Republican appointees.

Could the Reps not push for a constitutional amendment defining the right for an individual owner to have a gun?

Sure, and I think this would be easier to pass than the Marriage Amendment.

How would any SC decision be a rallying point for Republicans? Conservatives own this court. SEVEN of the nine justices are Republican appointees.

 

They could easily spin it as some of those choices were compromises to Dems so that approval would occur. They put forth a more conservative candidate and Dems rejected them.

 

I can see a message of "see what happens when we don't stand up to the wishes of the Dems, we get this." Elect us and we will stand up to what the Dems want to change our society into.

 

Could be an effective message.

Spin is all that is.

 

Thomas and Scalia were approved by Democratic majorities, and they're two of the most conservative people on the planet.

How would any SC decision be a rallying point for Republicans? Conservatives own this court. SEVEN of the nine justices are Republican appointees.

It could be argued that a good strict constructionist Justice could decide that individual gun rights aren't guarenteed under the specific language in the Second Amendment. Therefore, a conservative decision, would not specifically go hand in hand with the Republican conservative position.

So the only rallying cry is that we would need a new amendment to protect private gun ownership? Pretty sure any Democratic candidate in a battleground state is going to back that 110%.

So the only rallying cry is that we would need a new amendment to protect private gun ownership? Pretty sure any Democratic candidate in a battleground state is going to back that 110%.

 

If they stand up to the special interests groups of the Dems who don't want it.

If they stand up to the special interests groups of the Dems who don't want it.

They already do, in battleground states. Go look at NRA donations to candidates, voting records, etc.

IF THEY DO, it might hand the election to the Republicans who could use this issue as a rallying issue as gay marriage was in 2004.

 

Now you're using the old noodle. Satisfactory, LBBC.

Now you're using the old noodle. Satisfactory, LBBC.

 

Sometimes I use it for more than just a way to LOOK GOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sometimes I use if for more than just a way to LOOK GOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Somebody else has been showing up at BGP lunches pretending to be you. :sssh:

Somebody else has been showing up at BGP lunches pretending to be you. :sssh:

 

I dressed down those days cause I didn't want you guys to feel bad about yourself.

I dressed down those days cause I didn't want you guys to feel bad about yourself.

I still think you hurt Habib's self-esteem pretty badly.

 

How should weapons laws be handled? No registration? No restrictions? What say y'all?

I still think you hurt Habib's self-esteem pretty badly.

 

I think Habib could hurt me pretty badly.:lol: