SCOTUS tells us what we already knew...the 2nd Amendment is a personal right...DUH!

In another 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to keep and bear arms, including handguns, is a personal Constitutional right. That was obvious to me, but what shocks me is that it is not obvious to four of nine Supreme Court Justices. Basically, four justices attempted to amend the Constitution by fiat and failed. The vote NEVER should have even been close. It just goes to show that liberals (and it was the liberal justices who dissented) are out to control your lives and are willing to do so via the court system since they can not successfully do it via legislation or the amendment process as prescribed by the Constitution itself.

After reading about the court's decision, I was driving down the road and listened to Rush Limbaugh opining about the same thing, that four justices had tried to subvert our rights. I had already had that conversation with my buddy this morning, and here the same discussion was on the radio. I am glad that there are some people that are not so blind and can easily see things for what they are.

Here is the news story on the decision, and here is the decision itself. I have been reading and loving the logic of Justice Scalia's opinion. He uses strong language against the dissenting opinions, even calling them absurdity and grotesque. I love this guy. Finally, it is in an opinion for the nation to follow.

+1 for Obama, in my book

Occasionally I find myself in agreement with Barack Obama. Overall, we are at odds in our world view, but on this issue we are mostly in agreement. I read about how the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision found that the use of capital punishment for child rapists is "cruel and unusual punishment" and therefore unconstitutional. Well, capital punishment is neither cruel or unusual. It was the application in saying that the punishment did not fit the crime, which does not meet the criteria for deciding upon "cruel and unusual punishment", especially since the 10th Amendment guarantees that the states have such rights to decide these punishments. Personally, anyone guilty of such a crime does indeed deserve death. It is not exactly unscriptural for such a thing, nor is it an outrage to see some perverted child rapist taken out of society so that it will never happen again.

Barack Obama came out against the Supreme Court decision. Though he probably believes in a more narrow use of such a punishment than I do, I do applaud Obama for having the gonads to make such a statement and taking a stand in the arena of ideas.

Democrat Barack Obama said Wednesday he disagrees with the Supreme Court's decision outlawing executions of people who rape children, a crime he said states have the right to consider for capital punishment.

"I have said repeatedly that I think that the death penalty should be applied in very narrow circumstances for the most egregious of crimes," Obama said at a news conference. "I think that the rape of a small child, 6 or 8 years old, is a heinous crime and if a state makes a decision that under narrow, limited, well-defined circumstances the death penalty is at least potentially applicable, that that does not violate our Constitution."

See, I can give credit where credit is due. And Obama deserves my support for his stance on this issue. That is not to say that I support him for President...no frickin' way! But on this issue, yes.