Obama supports individual rights to bear arms

[Yurt]

mostly....



Obama supports individual gun rights

MILWAUKEE - Barack Obama said Friday that the country must do "whatever it takes" to eradicate gun violence following a campus shooting in his home state, but he believes in an individual's right to bear arms.

The senator, a former constitutional law instructor, said some scholars argue the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees gun ownerships only to militias, but he believes it grants individual gun rights.

"I think there is an individual right to bear arms, but it's subject to commonsense regulation" like background checks, he said during a news conference.

He said he would support federal legislation based on a California law that would facilitate immediate tracing of bullets used in a crime. He said even though the California law was passed over the strong objection of the National Rifle Association, he thinks it's the type of law that gun owners and crime victims can get behind.


Although Obama supports gun control, while campaigning in gun-friendly Idaho earlier this month, he said he does not intend to take away people's guns.

link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080215/ap_on_el_pr/obama;_ylt=Ah4I9RWIUaZQrzKanHLTHf8EtbAF)

political double speak? he's good.

[Monkeybone]

well that seals it! i'm voting for him if he can keep me armed

[Psychoblues]

Cool, thanks, yurt.

[Kathianne]

mostly....



Obama supports individual gun rights

MILWAUKEE - Barack Obama said Friday that the country must do "whatever it takes" to eradicate gun violence following a campus shooting in his home state, but he believes in an individual's right to bear arms.

The senator, a former constitutional law instructor, said some scholars argue the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees gun ownerships only to militias, but he believes it grants individual gun rights.

"I think there is an individual right to bear arms, but it's subject to commonsense regulation" like background checks, he said during a news conference.

He said he would support federal legislation based on a California law that would facilitate immediate tracing of bullets used in a crime. He said even though the California law was passed over the strong objection of the National Rifle Association, he thinks it's the type of law that gun owners and crime victims can get behind.


Although Obama supports gun control, while campaigning in gun-friendly Idaho earlier this month, he said he does not intend to take away people's guns.

link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080215/ap_on_el_pr/obama;_ylt=Ah4I9RWIUaZQrzKanHLTHf8EtbAF)

political double speak? he's good.

He's getting looked at closer, even from the left:

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/16/22186/4153


...

Not surprisingly, here, there and everywhere.

He believes (as do I) that the Second Amendment conveys an individual right to bear arms. But, he supports reasonable regulations on those rights. So where does reasonable regulation end and infringement on an individual's rights begin?


Obama is actually straddling the issue somewhat like the Bush Administration did when it filed a brief in the [D.C. gun] case last month. He does support individual rights, but says—and this is the qualifier--the government can impose reasonable restrictions on gun ownership. And he then suggests that pretty much any existing laws are reasonable.

Here's Obama's position and the video of his remarks. Shorter version: He straddles.

More...


He declined, just as the Bush Administration did, to take a position on whether the DC gun ban violates the 2nd Amendment. He said instead that states and cities should have broad latitude to regulate guns—even if the Constitution guarantees an individual right to own them.

“The city of Chicago has gun laws, so does Washington, DC,” Obama said. “The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can't initiate gun safety laws to deal with gang bangers and random shootings on the street isn't borne out by our Constitution.”

So Obama is in the same place as Bush on the D.C. Gun case.


Instead of embracing the categorical approach of D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman, who said a ban on handguns was a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment, the Bush Administration’s brief argued for a balancing test. It refused to take a position on the DC gun ban, and instead urged the Court to send the case back to the lower courts to apply the different, less strict standard.

...And if it’s constitutional to ban all guns in a city, as DC basically does, what’s the point of the 2nd Amendment? If that’s not unconstitutional, conservatives ask, what is? Nothing, they say.

Obama’s position on the 2nd Amendment may make that point for them. As he said today: “I think there's a lot of room before you (start) bumping against a constitutional barrier for us to institute some of the common-sense gun laws that I just spoke about.”

55 Senators, including 8 Democrats, Russ Feingold among them, signed onto a brief in the D.C. gun case last week taking the position that the gun ban infringed on an individual's right to bear arms.

Barack Obama, who says he believes in an individual right to bear arms under the Second Amendment, was not one of them.


Incidentally, Obama was not one of the 55 senators (including Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Russell Feingold and eight other Democrats) who signed a brief last week arguing the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right and that the DC gun ban was unconstitutional. That brief, also signed by 250 members of the House and Vice President Cheney, urges the Court to strike down the gun ban—and adopt Silberman’s test. Obama wouldn’t go that far. Neither would the Bush Administration.

I've written a little about Obama's record on gun control before.

Chicago Defender December 13, 1999,...

[Little-Acorn]

I get the feeling that Obama supports the rights of individuals to turn in their guns to the government, and/or to be fingerprinted, checked, go through mandatory waiting periods, fill our forms for govt permission to exercise a Constitutional right, and otherwise be treated like criminals, if they dare have the desire to own a firearm.

Not sure if Hillary supports that "right".