Hope for the Supreme Court???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ohio Gun Guy

Ohio Gun Guy

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
2,472
Location
Central Ohio
I expect a liberal judge appointment, but is it possible that the person will be slightly more gun freindly? Here is just one, but she's visiting the White House tomorrow. Is it a good thing? Anyone from the State up North able to give some insite on how Granholm is on the 2nd amendment?

An archived posting from the NRA ILA website.

Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm signed legislation Thursday that supporters say is aimed at strengthening and clarifying self-defense rights in Michigan. People now will be allowed to use deadly force, with no duty to retreat, if they reasonably think they face imminent death, great bodily harm or sexual assault. They can use deadly force on their property or anywhere they have a legal right to be.


Posted: 7/21/2006 12:19:42 PM
 
While the 2nd ammendment is very important to me I am also concerned with the Supreme's views on all of our rights. Sometime next month SCOTUS is going to rule on the case of the 13 year old girl from Safford AZ who was taken to the Principle's office and STRIP SEARCHED because they thought she might be in possession of IBUPROFEN. The initial reporting I have read seems to indicate that there is a very good chance they will rule that the girls rights were NOT violated by the school. Something is terribly wrong here.
 
I don't believe anyone could be much worse than Souter on the 2ndA (and arguably the 4thA). Anyone who replaces him can hardly be worse, and may be significantly more pro-civil-liberties.
 
Granholm has passed every pro-gun bill that made it to her desk.

We in Michigan have been VERY pleasantly surprised by her stance on the 2nd Amendment.

Who knows how she would vote on the Supreme Court though?

Although, compared to the other apparent candidates, I'd say she is our best hope.

Edit: IIRC, the NRA rates Granholm as a B-. That rating was before she signed our version of the Castle Doctrine Bill. So she might be rated a little higher now?
 
Last edited:
This is a bit gray. The Dems have retaken a lot of ground lately by reaching out to a broader field of candidates, pro-gun dems being a good example. They have loosened the club restrictions.

Whether or not this stretches over to SC nominees remains to be seen, but Obama is riding high popularity right now. I don't see why he would have to pick a moderate to pass confirmation. He can pick whomever he wants, they will pass confirmation, and not make a dent in his poll numbers. I'm not anticipating any kind of compromise.
 
Former Top Rated NRA Senator to Introduce Gun Ban This Week

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat and member of the so-called Blue Dog Coalition, plans to introduce an assault weapons ban this week. Gillibrand, the junior senator from New York, was at one time highly rated by the NRA for her advocacy of the Second Amendment.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/former-top-rated-nra-senator-to-introduce-gun-ban-this-week.html
Click to expand...

I don't really trust republicans to protect the 2A [cough] McCain [/cough], but I REALLY don't trust Democrats.
 
Well, given the alternative, certainly sounds much better. And I hope that NRA grade changes, as we know how quickly it can (or rather, should) - just look at Gillibrand. A sell out and fraud of the highest order. I hope the NRA changes her to an F or at least a D. It became quite clear where her priorities lay when she made her first comments on the pro-gun provisions in the DC voting bill.

I actually wouldn't have minded if she had been against it because of its inherent unconstitutionality... but instead, she was against it because of measures that would have reduced crime and increase safety in one of the most violent and crime-ridden cities in the United States.

Gillibrand IS pro-criminal... somehow she had convinced people she was pro-freedom. Granholm seems like a common sense woman, although I'm not familiar with her other actions (since let's admit it - the SCOTUS deals with MANY issues, and its of utmost importance to have someone who upholds not just the 2A, but every other part of the Constitution).
 
In an elected office, most of the successful dems in pro-gun districts will vote pro-gun. It is a matter of political survival. The same goes in reverse. There are repubs in liberal districts that basically vote like a liberal... look at Giuliani. However, in the case of becoming a justice in the SCOTUS, they never have to worry about pleasing the crowd anymore.
 
Michigan has a lot of hunting, and being anti-gun is not a good idea there. I would not be surprised if Granholm changed, having a history of changing when it's poltically expedient.
(For instance, despite originally standing for the auto industry, Granholm later abandoned them once Obama decided he wanted to bankrupt them)

I've had the misfortune of living in Michigan for a few years, Granholm is also very very good at making people think the government is solving problems when it's not. You'll always hear about the latest economic plan, which will always fail and their unemployment will stay at the highest in America.

Stay away from Michigan and beware of this politician.
 
I see some hope here. But like what was already mentioned, her views may change when the people can no longer change her out.
 
Napolitano is also on the list, and she is pretty friendly to gun rights.
 
Napolitano would be a nightmare. I can already see her somehow upholding a blacklist of "right wing extremists" as ok.
 
mljdeckardWhether or not this stretches over to SC nominees remains to be seen, but Obama is riding high popularity right now. I don't see why he would have to pick a moderate to pass confirmation. He can pick whomever he wants, they will pass confirmation, and not make a dent in his poll numbers. I'm not anticipating any kind of compromise
Click to expand...

It is not so easy to get stuff thru the senate. I think Obama could nominate a justice with a LOT of liberal opinions, but if he appoints anyone with any rulings against guns the Blue Dogs will go with the GOP and they won't get the votes. There is a pubilc consensus for a lot of liberal ideas but not gun control.

paul34
Well, given the alternative, certainly sounds much better. And I hope that NRA grade changes, as we know how quickly it can (or rather, should) - just look at Gillibrand. A sell out and fraud of the highest order
Click to expand...
.

I'd say Gillibrand wasn't really personally comitted to gun rights but previously she was representing a more pro gun area. Now in order to keep getting re elected she has to switch positions. Look at LBJ, he pretty much pushed civil rights legislation thru and went head to heat with Wallace over segregation but as a legislator representing a southern state he consistently voted against civil rights.

Drail
While the 2nd ammendment is very important to me I am also concerned with the Supreme's views on all of our rights. Sometime next month SCOTUS is going to rule on the case of the 13 year old girl from Safford AZ who was taken to the Principle's office and STRIP SEARCHED because they thought she might be in possession of IBUPROFEN. The initial reporting I have read seems to indicate that there is a very good chance they will rule that the girls rights were NOT violated by the school. Something is terribly wrong here.
Click to expand...

Amen. Actually in my opinion gun owners are in the best position since the early 60's. However the 4th Amendment has taken a HELL of a beating. I wish there was a segment of the population or interest group with the grassroots power of the gun owners that cared as passionately about privacy.
 
Former Top Rated NRA Senator to Introduce Gun Ban This Week

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat and member of the so-called Blue Dog Coalition, plans to introduce an assault weapons ban this week. Gillibrand, the junior senator from New York, was at one time highly rated by the NRA for her advocacy of the Second Amendment.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/former-t...this-week.html
Click to expand...

This story (and headline) is crap. Gillibrand is not attached to that legislation at all.

Read the story.

If you are going to criticize someone, at least criticize them on facts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top