Podcast: Robert Levy on the Second Amendment
Today we interview Robert A. Levy who is a senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute, and the driving force behide the effort to overturn Washington D.C.'s gun ban on Second Amendment grounds. To date, in D.C. no one but police officers and retired officers are allowed to have a gun in their home for self-protection. Mr. Levy hopes this case will change that.
He's won the D.C. Circuit and the case is to be heard before the Supreme court. We talk to Mr. Levy about the background of the case, why he filed it and if the decision will be a big issue in the 2008 elections. You can read a recent op-ed by Mr. Levy in the LA Times entitled, Unholster the 2nd Amendment to learn more about the case or listen to the interview or do both.
You can listen directly -- no downloading needed -- by going here and clicking on the gray Flash player. Or you can download the show and listen at your leisure by clicking right here. You can get a lo-fi version, suitable for dialup, by going here and selecting lo-fi. And you can always get a free subscription via iTunes -- and we'd like it if you did. Our show archives are at GlennandHelenShow.com.
This podcast was brought to you by Volvo Automobiles. Music is by Todd Steed and the Suns of Phere.
He's won the D.C. Circuit and the case is to be heard before the Supreme court. We talk to Mr. Levy about the background of the case, why he filed it and if the decision will be a big issue in the 2008 elections. You can read a recent op-ed by Mr. Levy in the LA Times entitled, Unholster the 2nd Amendment to learn more about the case or listen to the interview or do both.
You can listen directly -- no downloading needed -- by going here and clicking on the gray Flash player. Or you can download the show and listen at your leisure by clicking right here. You can get a lo-fi version, suitable for dialup, by going here and selecting lo-fi. And you can always get a free subscription via iTunes -- and we'd like it if you did. Our show archives are at GlennandHelenShow.com.
This podcast was brought to you by Volvo Automobiles. Music is by Todd Steed and the Suns of Phere.
Labels: Podcasts, second amendment
posted by Helen at 8:37 AM
5 Comments:
I heard some people were afraid of this case, because of they thought this would lead to more restrictions on the 2nd amendment. Personally, I think it is a good case and I'm hopeful liberty will prevail.
Regardless of the outcome, I think the SC intends to come to a decision which makes a broad statement. They certainly aren't taking this on to simply provide a precedent and guidance for D.C.
In my opinion, a "Militia" has always implied that the general citizenry could show up in the event of a general muster armed with their own weapons and a reasonable supply of ammunition. Although this seems almost rediculous in our country at this moment in history, the very fact that it could happen is what provides the stability that makes it seem rediculous. The "Well Regulated" part implies some sort of State control. Does this possibly mean (in the event of a decision leaning away from an individual right) that States could require citizens to maintain a supply of arms and ammunition? I think that's a streatch. But the various strategies that will be played out by each side, regardless of the decision, will see no end to creativity.
I have a lot of experience in countries where governments control all of the arms, and none are as free and safe as the U.S.
As a life long advocate of gun rights, as well as a licensed gun-tote'n yayhoo, I hope that the outcome leans toward an individual right with certain very limited restrictions; but that's probably a pipe dream.
No matter the ultimate decision on this case, the issue will never be completely settled - not in 2008, not in 3008; and that's exactly what the framers intended.
The state is exactly who the individual will need to protect himself from, eventually. The founding fathers knew that, too.
SCOTUS should have left Justice Silberman's clear and completely thorough decision stand as is.
However, our inalienable rights should rightly be re-established for those federal infringements of illegal legislation previously passed must be stricken down.
Bush has now pushed back the timetable for SCOTUS to hear the case with a meaningless delay tactic and we must let him know we will not stand for his disloyal meddling. Write him and phone his office for after all, he's the one who told us to write our representatives.
If you can push through a little legaleze, I highly, highly recommend it;
Parker vs. D.C. ( decision March 9, 2007 )
http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/dccourt04_7041a.pdf
080苗栗人聊天室性愛自拍UT視訊交友視訊辣妹av性感辣妹 sex女優彩虹頻道免費影片bbs論壇 限制級視訊交友網性愛免費色倩短片試看卡通a片18成人免費影片sex免費成人影片辣妹影片直播慣性背叛無限動漫色色網女同志聊天室ut 聊天室環球辣妹聊天室 90691同志色教館日本免費視訊線上aa片免費看18成人圖片區
Post a Comment
<< Home