Kagan a convert?

Z

zukiphile

New member
http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2521413

Above is a link to an article that includes Scalia's prediction that the Supreme Court will be taking another Second Amendment case in the near future. That does not seem an especially difficult prediction.

I thought more interesting were his comments about Kagan and the possibility of changing her views by changing her experience. Many here have written about the importance of introducing people to shooting in a friendly and non-threatening way. We imagine that each time we do this we incrementally increase the human acreage in which regard for the right can grow, and to decrease the opportunity for ignorant hostility. Achieving this with one of the nine Supreme Court justices is an extraordinary representation of the importance of that kind of hospitality.

This isn't strictly about any specific case law, so if this is better in general discussion, please make the move.
 
Last edited:
It's OK here. Interesting link - thanks.

What do I know - maybe Scalia is signaling the antis not to get to carried away with his cautionary notes in the recent decisions?

Personal ties are important - if Kagan moderates her views, that would be nice but it waits for an empirical test.

I would think the pre-emptive mental health gulags, forced reporting and bans from places like NY would not pass constitutional muster.
 
I would not say I am 'encouraged', but after reading that I might just be a little less disheartened than I have been of late...

Thanks for the link...
 
I'm trying to word this to stay non-partisan but Kagan has dedicated her life to a political movement that is at it's heart elitist. In their minds it's the great unwashed masses (us) that cannot be trusted to make the "correct" decisions about what to eat or what size soda to drink, and in no way in heck can be trusted not to hurt themselves and their neighbors if allowed guns - heck they (we) can't be trusted with a saltshaker :rolleyes:. In their view only the over-educated elites in government, their armed minions within government, and their close friends have a level of intelligence that allows them to be trusted with anything more deadly than a rubber spoon. It boils down to just because she now sees that an elite like herself can be trusted with a gun does not mean that she'll extend that trust to those that she sees as the great unwashed and ignorant masses but we can only hope that she rises above her prejudices.
 
Well, I hope both of them go for a Big Gulp after a hunting/range trip.

I understand the political undertones but yet again, remember we have members who are gun advocates across the common political spectrum.
 
...we have members who are gun advocates across the common political spectrum.
Click to expand...
That we do, and full faith & credit to them.... But part of that spectrum is determined to eat its own young if they stray from the (literal) party line:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/11/debbie-halvorson-nra_n_2661230.html

> A super PAC backed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg
> is going on offense against a Democratic Illinois special election
> candidate over her A+ rating from the National Rifle Association
> and her opposition to the expiration of an assault weapons ban.
>
> "Gun violence -- it's out of control," says a narrator. "Debbie
> Halvorson will make it worse. Halvorson opposes a ban on deadly
> assault weapons.
 
Hopefully some pro civil rights folks regardless of party will kick in a bunch of money to help Debbie Halvorson in the primary. Her victory in the primary for that district would be a heck of blow to the gun grabbers.
 
It would be nice to have Kagan on board, but in the end, we've still got Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and Roberts on our side. Kennedy seems amiable as well. None of those five are likely to have a massive sea-change in philosophy this soon after Heller and McDonald.
 
The next step is taking her out to shoot a Ruger Mk I, II or III. And then an LCR 22. With an explanation of its similarity to a self defense handgun a woman might choose to avoid a rape and murder!
 
Anything is possible. It is not uncommon for a Justice to stray from the political positions of the president who appointed them. Thank God for that. They are an essential check and balance on the Executive and Legislative branches - not subservient to either. Antonin Scalia has issued many decisions, particularly with respect to search and seizures, that one would typically not associate with the political philosophy of the Reagan administration. Will Kagan rule against gun rights in future cases? I wouldn't be surprised either way. Until then, it doesn't hurt to hold out a little hope, and it certainly doesn't hurt for her to gain more experience shooting. Just imagine if every judge went shooting with an old lever action rifle. Most of them would probably have a bit of fun doing so. They would see Cuomo's SAFE Act as infantile when they realize it criminalizes the possession of the lever action rifle they were just shooting with.
 
I also think that few people realize that a Supreme Court Justice is literally at the top of the heap. It's a lifetime appointment and no one can ever influence them against their will.

That, of course, is the whole purpose of judicial appointments. But it applies in full force with the Supreme Court.

This is not the Roosevelt era. In today's clime of instant news, no sitting President will ever again be able to threaten the Court with packing. The people would not stand for it and the Congress would look at their own powerbase and kill it outright.

Having written the above, I'm with Max. There is some little cause for hope.
 
I read about Kagan and her going shooting skeet and the hunting...I know she is a woman that grew up in NYC, but that doesn't automatically dmn her.

I have great hope that she will see the light.
 
She's obviously not a convert now, and I doubt anything will change anytime soon, but you never know.

It's certainly better to read that she went hunting than to read she went to get a 32-ounce soda.

Hopefully she had a fantastic time, and can't wait to go shooting again. If we get crazy with wishful thinking, she'll get into 3-gun competition, and all our rights will be saved. :D
 
you know the biggest reason I am hopeful is: She is not a rabid, plug the ears, na na, anti that cannot listen to reason.
 
While it's encouraging that she's gone hunting, I'm not ready to call her a convert just yet. I fear that Kagan may be the type of person who thinks that the Second Amendment is about shooting deer and ducks and thus, shouldn't protect self-defense oriented firearms. Until we have a ruling from her one way or the other, I'll continue to view Kagan as an unknown on Second Amendment issues.
 
Going hunting is only indicative of sporting use - which is not the RKBA.

There is a continuum of beliefs:

1. No guns
2. Guns for sport - sheer chance you use it for self-defense. Ban evil guns
3. Focus on SD but evil guns - no. You can defend yourself with a double barrel and SW Model 10 (actually not a bad pair for most situations).
4. You should be able to have the evil guns for SD (in more extreme cases) and defense against tyranny.

Most people see #2 as mildly acceptable. However, city folks probably don't like shooting Bambi. In fact, we drove by a group of Bambis last night. They were very cute. You don't really need to shoot their mommas. Just shoot those evil skeets.

If Kagan is moving to a #2, expect her to legitimize EBR and hicap bans.
 
You might see elitism in her comment. I see an acknowledgment of her slim experience in this area. It is certainly true that she is a member of an elite having attended good schools and spent her life in the ambitious pursuit of her career.

There is a large class of people who spend their entire adult lives in the office or commuting to and from work. The closest they come to an outdoor sport is the time they spend on a golf course with the other people from the office. That sort of life may sound cartoonish to many people here.

I remember a few years ago, inviting a couple of judges to come to the range with me. Neither had ever shot a firearm. However, at the invitation. These girls rolled their eyes and flatly refused.

Apparently, Kagan did not do this. She either asked to come along or accepted an invitation. This indicates an openness that we might not expect from someone of her life experience. I concur that this holds out only a hope which may be slightly more than we had about her before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top