Progress?


PDA






spartanpride
March 7, 2010, 02:47 PM
http://www.newsweek.com/id/234185?GT1=43002

Just thought this article might be interesting. :o

If you enjoyed reading about "Progress?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
hso
March 7, 2010, 02:50 PM
Here's the first page of the article talking about how a "liberal" legal organization sided with RKBA advocates in the SCOTUS McDonald case agains Chicago's gun ban. We've often pointed out that this is a cultural as well as a political/legal struggle. Changing the recent cultural bias against gun owners the Antis have worked so hard to create back to a neutral or positive view of responsible gun ownership is important in shifting the argument.

When the constitutional accountability Center launched in 2008, it looked like just another liberal legal-advocacy group, dedicated to "fulfilling the progressive promise of our Constitution's text and history." The causes it has backed run the standard liberal gamut: among other things, the group supports California's efforts to regulate carbon emissions and pushes for "robust due-process protections for immigrant criminal defendants." So if you were told that the CAC had filed an amicus brief in McDonald v. Chicago, a case about gun control to be argued before the Supreme Court this week, you might think it was siding with Chicago, whose restrictions on gun ownership are being challenged.


You would be wrong. For decades, liberals have opposed gun rights on the grounds that the Second Amendment is limited to the establishment of state militias. But some liberal dissenters from this view now say that is too narrow a reading of the Constitution. They contend that it fails to take into account the historical record and contradicts liberals' own reading of the Constitution's protection of individual rights.

The CAC has joined forces with staunch conservatives, including Steven G. Calabresi, cofounder of the Federalist Society, to support expanding individual rights, including gun rights, in the states—inviting the possibility that Chicago's virtual ban on handguns might be overturned. "There is a deeply progressive historical basis for some individual right to bear arms," says Douglas Kendall, the CAC's founder.


This is still far from the standard liberal view. But Kendall does have allies. Some sharp liberal legal minds are part of his campaign to reverse and embrace the right to gun ownership. "I believe in an individual right to bear arms, consistent with a living Constitution," says Adam Winkler, a professor of law at UCLA and a frequent participant in the American Constitution Society, the liberal answer to the Federalist Society. Winkler was one of eight scholars, including other prominent liberals, who signed the CAC's brief in the McDonald case.

What is going on here? For much of the nation's history, Kendall and his supporters argue, the right to bear arms was considered essential to citizenship. "Forty-two states in their state constitutions provide protections for the right to bear arms," says Winkler. "It is one of the longest-standing, most deeply entrenched rights in American history."

At the heart of the left-leaning dissenters' argument is a plea for consistency. For decades, liberals have insisted that the Constitution assumes—even if it does not explicitly spell out—a right to bodily autonomy. This right, long disputed by conservatives, is a basis for arguments in favor of abortion rights and gay rights. Liberals who support gun rights find a similar implied right to own weapons: after all, they say, what is the right to bear arms but the ability to protect your body from criminals as well as the government? "The right to bear arms gives you a mechanism to protect your bodily autonomy from attack," says Winkler.

rswartsell
March 7, 2010, 02:56 PM
It seems that real thought must be put into who is in agreement and who is an "enemy". The two communities of thought "liberal" vs. "conservative" have for too long been stereotyped and oversimplified. Free thinkers are able to arrive at opinions that may look like a smorgasbord of cliched opinion.

shockwave
March 7, 2010, 03:04 PM
It seems that real thought must be put into who is in agreement and who is an "enemy".

Very true and a perspective that is sadly in short supply here at THR. Two of the biggest, most fervent "anti's" that I know are both hardline Reaganite conservatives. They distrust people in general and, as a result, would prefer that none be armed. "Why do you need a gun?" they've both asked me when we've discussed 2nd A. And I've got Democrat friends who are NRA members. Whatever the dividing line is, it ain't "liberal vs conservative" and people had better figure that out because a lot of energy gets uselessly wasted due to this error in assumptions.

If you forced me to guess, I'd say that some of us are willing to take responsibility for our own protection as first-line responders for ourselves and our loved ones. Others refuse to do that, and that's the dividing line.

OcelotZ3
March 7, 2010, 09:59 PM
Of my friends, it's the die-hard conservatives who are proposing a new "assault weapon ban" (even though they couldn't even *define* an assault weapon when I asked), and who think that there should be limits to gun ownership.

Yes, the tables are turning, and people need to realize this before turning even more converts off with anti-liberal talk. I see it a lot on various gun boards.

oldfool
March 7, 2010, 10:05 PM
It seems that real thought must be put into who is in agreement and who is an "enemy". The two communities of thought "liberal" vs. "conservative" have for too long been stereotyped and oversimplified. Free thinkers are able to arrive at opinions that may look like a smorgasbord of cliched opinion.
yes.

KBintheSLC
March 7, 2010, 10:10 PM
I hope that more liberals will learn to accept this point of view. After all, liberals like the Bill of Rights too... albeit more towards the 1st than the 2nd. However, they really need to understand that many of our rights are really at the mercy of the 2nd amendment. Without it, freedom erodes rapidly.
Good for them, and more power to them. Lets work together to rebuild our foundation.

Jed Carter
March 9, 2010, 08:16 PM
Link has Virus!

Oncebitten
March 9, 2010, 09:55 PM
I read digg.com a lot, and the prevailing winds there definitely blow from the left. Even so, there is a very strong pro-gun sentiment in the comments whenever an article dealing with gun rights comes up. "Anti" comments are generally dugg-down to the point that they fall below viewing threshold.

If you enjoyed reading about "Progress?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!