Via Christian Science Monitor, it’s good news that SCOTUS seemingly isn’t all that eager to strike down all handgun regulation – and a bit of a shock, considering these are the same conservatives who ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller:
The US Supreme Court declined Monday to take up a potentially important gun rights case examining whether a federal regulation banning loaded firearms from vehicles in a government park violated the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
Lawyers for a Virginia man had asked the justices to examine a question left largely unresolved in the high court’s two prior landmark rulings identifying the scope and substance of Second Amendment protections. The question is: Does the Second Amendment guarantee a right to bear arms in public for personal protection?
The court dismissed the case in a one-line order without comment. The action leaves lower court rulings intact and postpones the prospect of high court clarification on a key gun rights issue.
In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment establishes a fundamental right of law-abiding individuals to keep a handgun in their home for self-protection. In 2010, the high court extended that ruling to apply Second Amendment guarantees beyond federal enclaves like Washington, D.C., to all state and local jurisdictions.
The dismissed appeal, Masciandaro v. US (10-11212), had asked the court to examine whether Americans have a right to carry loaded weapons in public places for self defense.
How the justices answered that question would have established guideposts for future gun regulations at the local, state, and national levels of government.
In the 2008 decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, the court said that gun rights are not unlimited. The court said there is no right to “carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
Gun rights advocates say that statement confirms a right to carry at least some weapons, in some manner, for some purpose.
The high court also said that “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places” would not necessarily violate the Constitution. Gun rights advocates counter that the statement, again, suggests that a right to carry firearms must therefore exist in non-sensitive places.
This post is written as part of the Media Matters Gun Facts fellowship. The purpose of the fellowship is to further Media Matters’ mission to comprehensively monitor, analyze, and correct conservative misinformation in the U.S. media. Some of the worst misinformation occurs around the issue of guns, gun violence, and extremism, the fellowship program is designed to fight this misinformation with facts.
An old boyfriend turned me on to many bands, including Sonic Youth. He was a real dick, but I have to admit he had great taste in music:
I just got off the phone with someone from the insurance company and they’re going to give me a January 1 effective date for the state pre-existing condition insurance pool created under Obamacare — which means I can have the gall bladder surgery once it kicks in. I don’t mind telling you: tears of relief.
And thanks to Natalie, the constituent services staffer from my (Republican) state rep’s office, John Taylor.
More and more, the so-called social media remind me of a children’s book I read to my son many years ago: There’s an Awful Lot of Weirdos in Our Neighborhood. More here.
Occasionally, someone asks me why I don’t cut Obama some slack. Stories like this one from Rock Center are why. Because when we have so many people in such desperate need, and so very little political capital has been expended to help them (especially that decision administration officials made not to help struggling homeowners, citing “moral hazard”) — well, he didn’t step up to this enormous task when he took office. It is a disgrace that people are living like this in the richest nation on earth, especially where there’s always money for military weapons:
At the stroke of midnight, a growing number of Americans are lining up at Walmart not to cash in on a holiday sale, but because they’re hungry.
The increasing number of Americans relying on food stamps to survive the sluggish economic recovery has changed the way the largest retailer in the United States does business.
Carol Johnston, Walmart’s senior vice president of store development, said that store managers have seen an “enormous spike” in the number of consumers shopping at midnight on the first of the month. That’s typically when those receiving federal food assistance have their accounts refilled each month.
“We’ll bring in more staff to stock. We’ll also make sure all of our registers…are open…Some people may think at 12:01, Walmart’s very quiet, but in a lot of our areas of the country, 12:01 is a big day or a big night for us, actually,” Johnston said.
Becca Reeder and her husband, T.J. Fowler, are one of the families shopping before the sun rises.
When NBC News visited their home six days before the first of the month, they had no milk in their refrigerator. Among the few things left were water, bacon grease for the dog’s food, a little bit of apple juice, cheese and tortillas.
The couple and their 2-year-old son, Miles, live in Nampa, Idaho, about a 30-minute drive from Boise. Reeder and Fowler married in September. She recently had to pawn her wedding ring to help support the family.
“As long as I got my family, I’m good,” she said.
The newlyweds are both certified nursing assistants but have been unable to find work in their field. Fowler is commuting an hour and a half round trip to a part-time job flipping burgers at a fast-food restaurant and Reeder is not working.
Another gall bladder attack. I went to the ER as the GI doctor told me to do if symptoms escalated (in this case, I was throwing up – a lot) but by the time they saw me in the ER, the pain was gone. They ascribe the vomiting to the diverticulitis and tried to push another round of antibiotics but I said no way and they backed off.
So it’s back to the BRAT diet for the next few days. I’m so sick of rice and bananas, I could scream.