Obama’s Latest Supreme Court Nominee: Merrick Garland, Anti-Gunner?

As soon as news broke that president Barack Obama would nominate Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court there was a mad scramble in the gun community to find out where this Chicago-born, appeals-court-Clinton-appointee stood on guns.

On some level, I think we already know.  If Clinton liked him enough to put him on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit  and Obama likes him enough to put him on the highest court in the land, don’t we know all we need to know about this guy already as it relates to our 2A rights?

Probably so.  But as we continue to vet Garland, we do have a write-up from Constitutional scholar and law professor David Kopel that comes courtesy of “America’s 1st Freedom.”

Merrick Garland is a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. He could be counted on not only to oppose Second Amendment rights in general, but even to nullify explicit congressional statutes that protect those rights.

In 2007, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit ruled against the D.C. handgun ban in the case of Parker v. District of Columbia (which was the name of the case that eventually became District of Columbia v. Heller when it went before the Supreme Court). The D.C. government asked for a rehearing of the case, before all 10 judges of the D.C. Circuit.

Six judges voted not to rehear the case, while four judges voted for a rehearing, presumably because they disagreed with the three-judge panel that had ruled against the handgun ban. Garland was one of the four judges who wanted a chance to validate the handgun ban.

In 2000, Garland was on a three-judge panel that heard the case of NRA v. Reno. In that case, the Janet Reno Department of Justice had flouted the congressional statutes that prohibit the federal government from compiling a registration list of gun owners, and which required the destruction of national instant check (NICS) records of lawful, approved gun purchases.

Judge Garland voted to let Reno get away with it. He said that registering all the people who were approved by NICS was permissible because Reno was not registering every gun owner in the country. And he said it was fine for Reno to keep gun buyer records for six months because although Congress had said the records must be destroyed, it did not say “immediately.”

So, while his anti-gun status isn’t explicitly clear, it is apparent that he definitely leans toward the gun-control side of the debate.

Now, perhaps a more critical question: is there any chance that the Senate will approve Garland’s nomination and allow him to take a seat on the SCOTUS bench?

If we are to trust the GOP leaders in Washington, the answer is a resounding, “no,” as they claim to be committed to not only opposing any Obama appointee but even going so far as to preclude a confirmation hearing from taking place.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel (R-KY) made it clear once again that the upper chamber will not be considering Garland.

“It seems clear that President Obama made this nomination not with the intent of seeing the nominee confirmed but in order to politicize it for purposes of the election,” McConnell said Wednesday.

McConnell said that the Senate will “revisit” the matter at a later time, noting that the people should have some input in who fills the vacancy left by the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

“The American people may well elect a president who decides to nominate Judge Garland for Senate consideration. The next president may also nominate somebody very different,” McConnell said.

So, it looks like Garland is not going to get his day in front of the Senate.  But I guess we’ll have to wait and see what happens.  GOP leadership doesn’t have the best record when it comes to fighting the Obama administration.

Beyond Garland though, our right to keep and bear arms hangs in the balance of the next president.  The next president could appoint two, three maybe even four justices in his or HER term in office, which depending on who is in the White House could mean the beginning of the end of the Second Amendment.

Basically, if Hillary gets elected.  We’re screwed.  She’ll either re-appoint Garland (assuming he doesn’t have his confirmation hearing) or maybe even someone more radically anti-gun.  And each of her subsequent nominees, we can assume, we’ll also be willing to go forth and repeal the 2A.

I don’t know who I’m voting for in 2016, but I know this, it’ll be anyone but Hillary Clinton!

Update: 4:22 p.m. EST, to add a statement from the NRA-ILA:

“With Justice Scalia’s tragic passing, there is no longer a majority of support among the justices for the fundamental, individual right to own a firearm for self-defense. Four justices believe law-abiding Americans have that right – and four justices do not,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA.

“President Obama has nothing but contempt for the Second Amendment and law-abiding gun owners,” Cox continued. “Obama has already nominated two Supreme Court justices who oppose the right to own firearms and there is absolutely no reason to think he has changed his approach this time. In fact, a basic analysis of Merrick Garland’s judicial record shows that he does not respect our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.”

“Therefore, the National Rifle Association, on behalf of our five million members and tens of millions of supporters across the country, strongly opposes the nomination of Merrick Garland for the U.S. Supreme Court, concluded Cox.”

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 91 comments… add one }
  • Rikk April 3, 2016, 12:05 am

    The most important sentence in this article is, I’m paraphrasing, I don’t know who I’m voting for, but it won’t be Hillary. Anyone who doesn’t see that a liberal (in Hillary’s case radically liberal), Administration, will see the decline of personal freedoms, that are already in free fall, a weak appeasing national policy and possibly the loss of the sovereignty of our nation. In a case of possibly the worst presidential candidates, Hillary is by far the most dangerous.. Anyone who loves what freedom we have left has to vote for whoever opposes Hillary. If your candidate does not get the nomination we have to support whoever gets the nomination, a non-vote is as good as a vote for Hillary. This is not the time for apathy, let’s leave our grandchildren some of the liberty we’ve known.

  • tim waller March 19, 2016, 10:28 am

    If You people wish anything on other people the only way to do so is to run for office. I don’t think any of you people could or would run for office much less be able to get elected. You cannot form a complete opinion of any of your views. So either put up or shut up!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Larry March 19, 2016, 5:01 pm

      Kiss off, dumbass! How’s that for a perfectly formed sentence, moron?

  • Gingerbaker March 19, 2016, 9:52 am

    What a bunch of paranoid morons you all are. In your pathetic little world, Democrats are evil, Republicans are just great, and the most important political issue is your gun rights. Pathetic.

    Meanwhile, back at the ranch, ie, the real world – NOBODY, even if they wanted to, can take your guns away. Because the Constitution says so. Because two important Supreme Court decisions have said so EXPLICITLY and are the law of the land. The idea that these precedents can be overturned within your lifetime or your child’s lifetime, or your grandkid’s lifetime is fuckin’ nuts.

    So why is the issue of your gun rights still such a hot button? Because you morons are the Republicans lap dogs, that’s why. They know that they have your votes forever, so long as they can keep you believing your 2nd Amendment rights are threatened. And you all just are too fucking stupid to realize it. So here’s a wake up call for you. You are being used.

    You are voting for assholes who don’t give one single shit about you or your families. And yet you get on your knees and suck their cocks, don’t you. And ask for more. These assholes don’t want you to have decent wages, or benefits. They don’t want you to have decent health care. Or family leave or sick time or union rights. They actually are against child labor laws. They don’t want you to have low-cost college rates, or low-cost interest rates on college loans. They even passed a law to make it impossible for you to declare personal bankruptcy. These Republican assholes you vote for consistently vote to deny decent benefits for Veterans – or haven’t you paid attention? NO? Well, fuck you then.

    And btw, these Republican assholes don’t give flying fuck about the environment, either. Which means habitat loss. Say goodbye to decent hunting, boys. But what do you care? You voted for some asshole who told you your 2nd Amendment rights were his priority, right? And you fell for it. Hook, line, and sinker.

    • jimmy March 19, 2016, 2:12 pm

      I was taught that the 2nd Amendment was there to protect our right to bear arms—–“protect” that right ,not give us that right. Our
      Forefathers included the 2nd Amendment in the Constitution of the United States of America to guard us from tyranny. This gun-grabbing is about as tyrannical as it gets. It’s time we stand up and say enough is enough and this is going to STOP!.

      • jimmy March 19, 2016, 2:36 pm

        What’s up? Will my comment be posted?

      • Rikk April 3, 2016, 12:12 am

        Just a couple things, Democrats are not evil, gun grabbing liberals ARE. If you don’t think guns can be confiscated talk to people in the United Kingdom and Australia.. Very few politicians really care for anyone but themselves, that’s not new. Free people have the right to be armed to protect ourselves and loved ones and oppose tyranny.

      • Rikk April 3, 2016, 12:28 am

        The 2nd Amendment is, along with the other Amendments, part of the Bill of Rights. You can not protect a right you don’t have.. I agree with a lot of your comment and to guard against tyranny is one of the reasons. It is much more than that though. The shortest way I explain it is a Free man,s right to keep and bear firearms to protect himself and loved ones, hunt, use in target sports or collect should never even be questioned. If they ever told the truth about guns purchased legally by law abiding citizens this wouldn’t even be an issue, since we are all 100 times more likely to be killed by a drunk or reckless driver than be killed in a “mass shooting”. The 100 times figure is LOW BALL.

    • Larry March 19, 2016, 5:07 pm

      You’re also an idiot. I haven’t hunted for anything on four legs in over 35 years but I do know that lots of the money spent by the hunters go toward conservation &, without it, you anti gun, anti hunt leftist weenies would get to see the deer & other herds be decimated by disease very quickly.
      You butt wipes really do need to get your “facts” straight before posting on a pro gun site. You should maybe go back to your preferred Marxist/anarchist sites & ask them for proof of their “facts” before you take them as gospel, post them to our sites & expect us to believe you are anything other a pack of nincompoop morons.

    • Corey March 20, 2016, 12:18 pm

      you are very bitter ginger … Bottom
      Line – you can take away citizens guns but criminals will still ALWAYS get them – and we are defenseless …. FACT !!!

    • Jack March 20, 2016, 12:39 pm

      What is Pathetic here is your lack of the ability to make a point without using foul language.

      You would be taken more seriously if you had a better vocabulary.

  • Jim C. March 18, 2016, 11:07 pm

    Of course this nominee is anti-gun. He is also for gay marriage, and a pro-abort. If there is anything consistent about Obama, it is that he never lets a crisis (death of Scalia, etc.) go to waste when he can use it to push his agenda.

  • Foxtrap March 18, 2016, 5:41 pm

    Hillary has already said that as President, she’d consider appointing Barack Obama to SCOTUS. AS such, we can expect Obama to pardon her for her crimes in order to get the reward.

    • JungleCogs March 18, 2016, 7:00 pm

      Maybe… but, I do not think King Obama wants real work – too lazy.

    • Dennis M March 27, 2016, 12:42 am

      Just think, if Hilary is elected she would be the first president that would pardon herself for her crimes against this country. Or, she would be the first president to serve from Levenworth.

  • law dawg March 18, 2016, 4:26 pm

    These comments have all been very interesting. What the real agenda here folks is the elitist want to cleanse the world of people who have a brain, and who can think on their own two feet. It doesn’t matter if they make guns illegal. The government is already in the process of that right under our noses and gun confiscation started years ago folks…think about it? Every other day a new law comes into play….there’s almost more paper work to fill out when buying one as there is when purchasing a house. We can complain about it all day long , 24/7, but if we do nothing about it we have no one to blame but our selves. It’s very obvious that the government has become way to strong and the citizens are fine with status quo. If the law abiding citizens in this country, what ever creed, race, religion, and so forth, don’t get out to vote these morons out of office it’s going to get really ugly. People like Obama, Reid, Kerry, Fienstein, Pelozi, and the Clintons need to be in prison making license plates. The people in this country are fed up with the politicians and fat cats that have become rich off the blood and sweat of the hard working folks. Obama and the Clintons are evil, evil people who want nothing more than to destroy our country and to make the populous submersive to them…….”Wake Up America!!!!”

  • Jimbo March 18, 2016, 3:43 pm

    I believe that it may be possible that Obama is considering declaring Martial Law – sometime before he leaves office.
    To do so would be necessary to disarm the people.

    Question: Why is he arming up multiple government departments ? To put down a rebellion perhaps?
    Why does he have about 50 “Czars”? Could it be a “Shadow” government to replace Congress?

    I hope there are people keeping a close eye on him.

    • Larry March 19, 2016, 5:10 pm

      I’ve thought that could be his ultimate goal since he took the White House. Little Barry, el-Presidente for life of the latest third world banana repubic! Keep your powder dry, my friends & be safe out there.

  • LHS March 18, 2016, 12:49 pm

    “….LEANS towards the gun control side…”?? I believe “leans” would be an incorrect use of that word, extreme understatement and foolish to even employ based on his past and present rulings and opinions. Yet another in-the-DNC-pocket activist, so-called judge. We are fed.up.with.this.

  • Tom Walker March 18, 2016, 12:39 pm

    This guy is to the left on Gun Control. Any Democrat nominee would be. However, this guy is more moderate than most.

    The Republican strategy is very high risk, especially with Trump as the expected nominee. Hillary will not only beat him, but with a Trump run, a significant number of moderate Republicans and Independents not voting for Clinton are expected not to vote which will put control of the Senate at risk. In that scenario Obama could very likely pull the nomination and either nominate someone both younger (remember, these appointments are for life) and much more liberal.

    Not good choices, but better to take the moderate devil you know rather than risk a meltdown. And if the Republicans do win you get a majority on the Supreme Court back with the next liberal replacement.

    • Alan March 18, 2016, 1:10 pm

      Interesting post. So, when Trump DOES win, are you gonna eat your words?
      I would also point out that thus far, It ISN’T a “Republican” strategy, hell they’re trying to torpedo the guy.
      The Republican strategy is business as usual.

      • Tom Walker March 18, 2016, 2:17 pm

        I wish there was a way you and I could put real cash on this. I’d be able to buy a new gun. You can take it to the bank. Trump will lose big. Many Republicans including me simply won’t vote for him. He’s too dangerous. Could get us into a war where someone shoots big bullets back.

        Go look at recent polls from places like the Business Journal (not CNN or Washington Post type attitude for sure) rather than polls that just tell you what you want to hear. The readership of the publication is major pro-business and probably 75% or more Republican. It says on Trump vs Clinton 43% Trump and 40% Clinton with 17% who either won’t vote or will vote for a third party. Guess where those 17% are coming from? Not just President–but the Senate could be at risk if a significant number of Republicans and Independents who can’t stand Hillary but won’t vote for Trump simply stay home.

        One of the biggest problems in America today are all the news sites that promote their side rather than be balanced and honest. Fox Conservative–CNN Liberal. Everyone listens to the one with their beliefs and thinks what they say is right. Hard to get a balanced view. Result is you can believe your outlet and walk into a buzz saw because it slants the view and is not factual.

        • Jay A. March 18, 2016, 4:54 pm

          Tom, if Trump is the Republican candidate, and you DON’T vote for him who will you vote FOR? I don’t think you would vote for Clinton, so then who?

          If you and everyone else who doesn’t like Trump sit out the election, Hillary WILL win, and then we all get what you caused.

          Trump may not be the best choice, indeed he isn’t my preference, but better him than another 4 years of Democrat control.

          And if he does get us into a war with someone who has “big bullets” I think he would let the war dogs off the leashes. Not a desirable choice to get into in the first place, but enough of the cow-towing to those who would see us fall.

          • Tom March 18, 2016, 8:30 pm

            As I said I won’t vote for Trump and there are a lot of Republicans like me. Most likely too many. Maybe a miracle will occur and he won’t be the nominee.

            I’d rephrase what you said. If you support Trump YOU are ensuring Clinton’s victory. Unfortunately, most people supporting him are sticking their head in the sand on that little significant possibility.

          • Tom March 18, 2016, 8:35 pm

            To specifically answer your exact question I’m not sure who I will vote for, but it won’t be Trump. Lots of people I know feel the same way.

          • Tom March 18, 2016, 8:36 pm

            To specifically answer your exact question I’m not sure who I will vote for, but it won’t be Trump. Lots of people I know feel the same way.

          • Larry March 19, 2016, 5:14 pm

            Every single one of us who knows that Hillary, the Evil, the most vile creature on earth, will finish off our once great country, must vote for her opposition, whether it be Trump or Cruz or, God forbid, Kasich, or…! To do otherwise would be treasonous in my humble opinion.

          • Aaron G March 21, 2016, 11:19 pm

            I have spent the majority of my days on the left side but I’d vote for Trump before Hillary. Or anyone else who’s anti-gun. Those assholes can just go to Europe.

    • SKTrynoskySr March 18, 2016, 7:39 pm

      I will have to agree with Jay and Alan here. Trump getting us into a war? He is no neo-con, not by a longshot. Take that from someone who made the mistake of voting for Bush II twice! My oldest, the Army officer warned me about the Bush-Neo crew and their progressive stance on American foreign policy needing to “make the world safe for democracy”. The current POTUS is a bumbling idiot on foreign policy. Forget the ME, his poking Putin in the eye over and over coupled with the overthrow of the elected government in the Ukraine shows what a real threat the guy is.With the exception of Rand Paul and Trump, every single one of the 17 original GOP candidates wanted to send troops just about everywhere. You sound like someone who probably said the same about Reagan and if you are old enough Goldwater. The best defense is still a strong offense and it is pretty clear that Trump is looking for cooperation with Putin. China is a different matter entirely. They are totally unpredictable and doing something or doing nothing could set them off.

  • Ymmot March 18, 2016, 12:10 pm

    One other item of note as was already mentioned, there are over 400 million guns in America in PRIVATE hands!
    Every time a snot gobbling Anti-gun Lout in any position of authority starts drooling over gun control pubicly, that action alone sells over 1000 guns a day!
    So let the snot gobbling asinine asshole Communist Progressive Liberal Trash whine and snivel about gun control, it will never happen and I look for most of the unconstitutional laws around same to be abolished in the coming future!
    This is the last gasp of Socialism folks under the present Communist Progressive Liberal Half-White Trash currently defiling the WHITE HOUSE!

  • Dan March 18, 2016, 12:03 pm

    The problem with this debate is that one side is stating that it opposes gun control, and the other is stating that it is for gun control. ***Yes this is the problem*** In order to protect our right to keep and bear arms, we must all be in favor of gun control. Each time there is an incident of violence committed by a criminal, a mentally unstable individual, or by accident, more people side with the anti-gun movement, and if we start seeing a lot of those incidents in a rather short period of time, public sentiment will force the politicians that have been taking money from the NRA, and that we think are protecting our rights, to flip flop on this issue like the fish that most of them are. If they want to take our guns, they will simply take them and declare that possession equals terrorism, or something along those lines, which will force us to give them up because the cost of not doing so will be so high. The more restrictions on ownership, the less risk of confiscation, as long as they do not make it financially burdensome, I think it is going to be inevitable.

    • Ymmot March 18, 2016, 12:15 pm

      You have either lost you everliving mind or you need to get off whatever drugs is deluding you!
      Am I getting through your delusional state, FOOL!

    • Alan March 18, 2016, 1:18 pm

      Wow! You haven’t paid attention to what has happened in other countries at all.
      Your synopsis is EXACTLY how near total confiscation went down in Australia.
      Besides, with total confiscation, comes revolution.
      Because with total confiscation, we are NO LONGER a free CONSTITUTIONAL society.
      Surely you must realize this with such statements as “possession equals terrorism”.

    • Matt Haylett March 18, 2016, 2:18 pm

      Come and git em Dare ya

    • Glenn Bostick March 18, 2016, 5:12 pm

      I live in northeast Tennessee and I will guarantee you that if gun grabbers come into this area they will find themselves keeping company with the revenue agents who lie buried somewhere. Seriously, do you really think 80 million people who value their guns for sports, competition and home protection are just going to put out the welcome mat for the gun grabbers? I know at least one police chief and some state police and sheriffs deputies that hope this never happens because they will resign to preserve their lives. They have told me so privately. Another thought. If our strong military, who are sworn to defend the Constitution, would ever think about doing this they might consider that they still have not shut down terrorism in Afghanistan against a loose army of rag muffin terrorists even with all the weapons systems we have provided them. So, just not going to happen no matter what the politicians say. By the way. They have to live where we live. They might want to consider that too.

  • Tommy Barrios March 18, 2016, 11:55 am

    What WE need to put stop to, is courts making up laws and that includes the United States Supreme Court, most of all!
    The USSC is supposed to uphold and defend the Constitution as the Founders prescribed in the the Federalist Papers and other tomes of writing on the subject not make up laws that suit a particular social cause left or right!
    Wanna make America great again!
    Throw the present BUMS off the SCOTUS!

  • Occams March 18, 2016, 11:14 am

    And this ‘decision’ surprises….who?

    ~ Occams

  • Kane March 18, 2016, 10:58 am

    A Democratic President has not nominated a White Anglo Saxon Protestant for the USSC since Harry Truman. A very strange pattern over more than 50 years. If Hillary Clinton becomes President then it is very likely that she will nominate Barrack Obama to the USSC. What a scary thought that the man in the Executive Office who pushed a covert trade pact could have reign on in the Judicial Office.

    By the way I am Catholic but I have to wonder how no Protestants have been nominated since Truman. Right now the USSC is Catholic and Jewish.

  • Dr. J L Smith March 18, 2016, 10:43 am

    Did anyone else see the piece on Fox News last night wherein Justice Alito said, “Garland is a moderate. He is pro-abortion, and against guns.” ?

    Big surprise!

    This morning, there is nothing on the internet anywhere about that very telling statement! Thank you, Justice Alito, for the heads-up!

    Apparently, the liberal controlled media doesn’t want THAT slip of the tongue to get out there…

  • leonard feinman March 18, 2016, 10:18 am

    Take them up on the nomination, debate it, and reject him. Who knows what the election might bring? We know he would not be affirmed at this time, but when the elections are done, we don’t know who will be representing us.

    • dave March 18, 2016, 10:36 am

      Good suggestion. There is no sound reason for not debating this Constitutional mandate at this time…Here’s a scary thought: Donald Trump nominating our next Supreme Court Justice…

      • CHRIS March 18, 2016, 11:10 am

        I think people are less scared of wild card Donald trump vs anti civil rights Hilary Clinton.

        • Tom Walker March 18, 2016, 1:40 pm

          Most predictions I’ve seen indicate Trump would lose against Clinton. And maybe take the Senate with him.

      • Dan March 18, 2016, 12:06 pm

        He would be torn between a property developer he owes money to and a Playboy Bunny for his nomination!

    • Tim March 18, 2016, 12:16 pm

      Agreed! That way you don’t get accused of not co-operating.

      • Tim March 18, 2016, 12:32 pm

        Strongly support the 2nd amendment. Registration is on step away from confiscation. How to keep the guns out of the hands of the crazy and evil???? Frustrating situation and more so frustrating when politicians are using our lives for their financial gain. Politician has become a job, not a service to your country. That is the real problem. Hillary, Cruz, Trump…..They all suck! How do you pick the least sucky? Obama has increased the size of the poor population and given them Govt. handouts. Hillary promises to do the same. How do you compete against that? With a little jar of CRAZY! Cruz I think would do a better job but Trump has the only chance to beat Hillary. Crazy can only carry you so far. Problem is we have no idea where Trump really stands on anything.

        • Alan March 18, 2016, 1:40 pm

          This is what I get a kick out of, the idea of prevention.
          There is NO prevention, NO ONE knows who will go crazy at any given time, per se.
          Folks, this is the price of a free and open society.
          Always has been, always will be.

    • Matt Haylett March 18, 2016, 2:22 pm

      Republicans can confirm him in lame duck if need be. It would be sad but might be better than total lib

  • Rex Dickerson March 18, 2016, 10:03 am

    Very distressing. I’m 62. Ten years ago, I never thought I might see the end of the 2nd Amendment in my life time. Now I’m fairly certain to see, at the very least, a Federal gun registry. The urban device addicted populace doesn’t appreciate the freedom and individual Liberty the Constitution bestows upon us. They will tomorrow; when it’s too late.

  • mogel March 18, 2016, 9:58 am

    you can bet the ranch that this guy will be the worst possible guy where America is concerned. i do not know why the American people have not removed obummer from office by now. maybe they are not smart enough to realize he is and will destroy America. soros will see to that. same question concerning soros, why is this nazi loving chunk of fecal matter still living in America, or simply still living. wake up world, there are people, evil people who want to control every aspect of your life. why are you letting them do that? aren’t you smart enough to manage your own life? maybe not, if you let the evil ones continue to lead you around by the nose.

    • dave March 18, 2016, 10:23 am

      “obummer”???… Here’s a thought; Most of America voted for President Obama! Not once, but twice. He better pick up on his pace to “destroy America” because he only has 8-10 months to get it done after lolly-gagging around for the previous 7-1/2 YEARS!…He has done nothing to impact “gun rights” except to expand carry options on Federal Land and Federal Parks…With all this doom and gloom perhaps it’s not a bad idea for you to pack up and move to….a place where your “Nazi paranoia” is well founded; say a place like Russia?

      • Don Tros March 18, 2016, 11:12 am

        Dave, do they pay you to troll on these sites and attempt to deceive people into believing that these people aren’t really interested in gun control? The guns must go. They cannot have an armed population as they proceed towards world government. To say otherwise is foolishness!

      • CHRIS March 18, 2016, 11:29 am

        He has done everything he could to fight civil gun owership. Also shoved obamacare (a socialist program) down everyone’s throats with a late-night vote before anyone could even read it. He has stoop up and lied right to the american peoples faces about guns. He has oppointed two anti gun justices to the supreme Court and is workinhg on a third. How the heck can you sit there and say he has done nothing? Oh yeah you are an ignorant brainwashed doll.

      • Dan March 18, 2016, 12:08 pm


      • Rod March 18, 2016, 12:18 pm

        Dave how dare you post facts of whats happened in the last 7 plus years and not join in on knowing what evil plans lay await for us. If those of us that love 2 nd amendment do not come up with a way of keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and kids voters will be who takes away our rights. If guns were only held by those that are supposed too them they would have no grounds to be trying to take them away. What do expect any president to say after repeated school shootings.

    • Don March 18, 2016, 11:03 am

      That is sure the trough , hope I get to help put a stop to it !!!!!!

  • freedomfighter March 18, 2016, 9:29 am

    Obozo and the twat Hillary can push through whatever law they want,,big deal,,there is over 400 million guns in the US already,,and THEY are not going anywhere no matter what law they come up with,,gun people will NEVER give up their weapons,,it’s as simple as that,,they have billions of rounds already stockpilled,,and you can bet your ass no government is ever getting their hands on it,,these anti gun Liberal retards know it full well,,but it looks good to the chicken shit people who believe their government will take care of THEM,,good thing is,,they are usually the first ones taken over,,and then they try to find the closest armed person to defend them,,,they stick their heads in the samd and hope SOMEBODY ELSE will protect them,,poor brainwashed libtards,,it’s sad really,,but in the end,,if shit hits the fan,,they will be the first gene pool to be errased,,

    • pardnah... March 18, 2016, 10:05 am

      Your racist and sexist comments show ignorance and does nothing to advance any agenda, gun right advocates, or positions because of the disrespect inherent in your dis-associative rantings…What part of ANY of your sentences are relative to the nomination of this respected Jurist to the Supreme Court?

      • Kane March 18, 2016, 10:39 am

        Please point out the “racist and sexist comments” because I missed those specific elements in the original post.

      • Richard Thomas March 18, 2016, 11:39 am

        Respected jurist huh? Maybe he is respected but that doesn’t necessarily make him the best candidate or even in the pool of the best candidates. However you want to look at it, most gun owners would prefer a conservative jurist with a proven record of supporting the second amendment as well as the other amendments to the constitution.

  • Henry March 18, 2016, 8:09 am

    What everyone fails to see is both sides are against guns. Look into republican run Brady Campaign . They claim liberals are out for your guns yet they lobby handgun bans, want tougher laws then Brady bill brought, and backed black rifle ban Clinton put in place. Remember GOP hero Reagan started toughest gun control laws in the country during his term. Bush reinforced them and defended a cities rights to ban guns.

    • dave March 18, 2016, 10:10 am

      Well…an insightful comment. You’ve read something, formed an opinion, and are able to share your thoughts and position. Congratulations. It is about time someone mentions those positions espoused by Mr. Reagan, those “republicans” that followed and get off the short-sighted bashing of all thing “Obama” and Hillary Clinton regardless of their merit, or accuracy and veracity within these “forum”…which often turn out to be nothing less than “postings” of extreme unfounded diatribes.
      Thanks Henry…

  • BigC March 18, 2016, 7:39 am

    I thought the right to keep and bear arms was already decided by the Supreme Court, in the affirmative! Why do they keep dragging this issue up? Once a point of contention is ruled upon, that should be the final say and not something to dragged out every couple of years…………..IT”S DECIDED LAW!!!!!!!!!!

    • Nate March 18, 2016, 8:49 am

      Dred Scott?

    • dave March 18, 2016, 10:13 am

      …It has. It has been. It will be. And no President, current or future, has expressed any intentions to do anything related to what is often espoused as inevitable within these/many similar forums…

      Wonder how many “posters” have any idea of what Dred Scott is?

    • Tom Walker March 18, 2016, 1:58 pm

      The two issues are whether a Milita or individuals have the right to bear arms and what constitutes reasonable limitations for the safety of the American People instituted by individual states. Both are up for grabs if there is a majority and especially a super majority of liberal Justices. Most risky are individual states putting more and more limitations on guns and the Courts upholding those limitations. That avoids the US Congress refusing to act on Gun Control. Put your head in the sand if you want, but it is going to get worse.

      Like it or not fewer Americans as a percentage own guns and it is not moving in the right direction. Those people and many gun owners are demanding something be done about the large shooting incidents.

    • SSGRick March 18, 2016, 3:57 pm

      Big C don’t you know that the ONLY decided LAW CASES are those that also coincide with the positions & policies of the democrat party such as: abortion, phag marriage, no Bibles in schools, no school prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, men in women’s rest rooms, women in men’s rooms, men in women’s locker rooms etc etc etc.

  • mtman2 March 18, 2016, 7:14 am

    Look people, when you saw lesbians Kagan+Sotomayor shued right into the scotus- “the writing was on the wall”.
    No fight happened period! Neither were qualified for that high level of jurisprudence(or actually any)
    Having both along w/justice Ginsburg personally presided over, officiated and married “same sex couples”
    pryor to the un-Constitutional opinion against Americans will to “find” for S.M.Marriage from thin air and not being a legislative branch it was suddenly now considered law- *but it is not as the legislative branch had not voted it so.
    IF any judge has a shown an open embrace of a controversial issue it means they must RECUSE themselves or
    it is an opinion without any validity and must be thrown out. I have not heard of any like that going on yet.

    WE can seriously consider the 2nd-Amendment is next, one way or another anyway they can cripple it.
    But only because of gutless, lying and useless RINOS- are evidently complicit-!
    You can bet they’re not deaf, only indifferent to OUR(WE the People) will and wishes tho it violates their oaths
    and even the majority that does believe in that oath to the Constitution.
    All the political-class is fishing for a way to get around both us and OUR 3-Founding documents on the Globalist(internationalist-OneWorlders) list of necessary volitions to break the USA.
    Are you a God and country Patriot?
    The pesky Christian mentality in the strong patriotic pride + knowledge of OUR Founding is what stops them.
    This is why they’re dumbing down successive generations till WE won’t know WE are cooked like the proverbial frog.

    A pastor and the men of his congregation stood at Lexington for the- “SHOT HEARD ROUND THE WORLD”.
    Its not about violence, they did that so WE don’t have to- as OUR revolution is at the voting booth, which has been abdicated by a majority for waay too long(60% did not show up in 2012).
    The “Silent-Moral majority” aka “the sleeping giant” needs to wake up, it is past the 11th hour ~!

    • dave March 18, 2016, 10:32 am

      There are so many mis-informed partial statements and diatribes here it makes for a target-rich environment for rebuke. The disrespect for basic Constitutional structures, the representatives and elected/selected/approved holders of those positions, and basic ignorance of 8th grade Government and Civics is distressing, if it were not so laughable. Reminds of of trying to dissect a single sentence uttered by Donald Trump at a Campaign Rally! (Try it: How many “subjects” can the Trumpster include in a single dis-jointed sentence! Talk about mind blowing!)(And. Don’t beleive this, read George Will’s recent commentary on this guy!!) Oh by the way, This Country was FOUNDED on the principal of freedom of Religion. The willingness to defend a person’s right to such inalienable rights is the mark of a true Patriot… Look it up. Just don’t use internet forums as your resource…good luck.

  • Bob Siebel March 18, 2016, 6:33 am

    The Constitution is not a Living document- it was intended as the Law of the Land, not subject to change to protect us from both foreign and domestic (Gov’t out of control) threats. Not subject to change or misinterpretation! God Bless this country!

    • dave cole March 18, 2016, 10:34 am

      Hmmm… Then what is The Bill of Rights? What about all those things called…??? oh, what are they???…Oh Yeah! Those pesky Amendments to the Constitution?

      • Matt Haylett March 18, 2016, 2:35 pm

        Absolutely! There is a process for amending the constitution and it has nothing to do with activist judges. They seem to forget that

  • bill March 18, 2016, 6:14 am

    HA HA HA. Yes, Waite, Till That BITCH, Get’s In. Then, You Will, See How She Will Clean, Our GUN’S, From, Us. She Was Told She, Was To Get In, The White House, Last Time, ?? Then, That Told Her, To Waite. And Let This Ass Hole Get In. Becouse, He Is BLACK. ???? (Maby) And, We can See what He Has Dunnn To This GREAT COUNTRY. And Is Not DUNNN YET. I Will, Do All I Can Do To Stay Free. I Am An OLD Man. A X- U.S.M.C. Ret. ??? 100 % DAB.?? And Dont, Have A Lot To Go. But. I Will, Stand, By My GREAT COUNTRY. YES. Keep Bying, All The Ammo You Can, Now, Becouse. She Will. STOP It From You Getting It. Would You Like To BET. ??? I Will Go Down Fighting. To Save This GREAT COUNTRY. YES. ???

    • Mike March 18, 2016, 12:04 pm

      Learn how to spell you nut job, then someone might actually take you seriously. You hold on dearly to your guns and your bible!!!!! Haha. Obama is a good man, a decent man. Get your head out of the sand and realize that you racist. Stop watching Fox Noise you crack. No one is going to take your guns away. It’s not going to happen. All you nut jobs with mental health issues (All of you really) are the ones that are worried, and rightly so. At the very most, it will be hard if not impossible for people with mental health issues to get guns, and background checks will be more extensive and take longer. BUT THAT IS IT! I love my guns as much as the next person, but you all need to get a grip on reality. It’s not going to happen. Put your effort into something constructive and build something, or help a fellow American with something. Acts of kindness. All you Trump supporters are the problem in this country. You ALL blame other people for your problems and your shortcomings. You blame Obama which is pathetic. One man, One President, is not to blame for your miserable lives. He really isn’t. You people need to wake up. It’s people like you that make me think this country is almost not worth saving. You are all going to get what you deserve in the end. I’m talking to myself here though I know, it will never change, and you will never stop blaming other people for your problems and your sh** lives. I’m sorry that you’re poor. I’m sorry that you’re children are pathetic and non-educated and not going anywhere in life. Not Obama’s fault as much as you wish it was. Can’t wait to see you all change your attitude when North Korea launches a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Hawaii. You will be crying and clinging to Obama and hanging on every word he says, and hoping that he saves your miserable lives. This country will eventually dissolve in a nuclear fireball, and the world will be better off without people like you walking it. Take some responsibility for your lives people, and realize that you failed. You failed your wives, husbands, and children. You are complete failures, and you have no one to blame but yourselves. The truth hurts, I know. But that is reality.

      • Joe McHugh March 18, 2016, 5:23 pm

        Hey Mike, I’m sure that many of the readers are challenged and refreshed by your insightful views. However, if this country “…will eventually dissolve in a nuclear fireball,…” wouldn’t you dissolve too? Your argument is somewhat self-defeating, isn’t it?

        “You hold on dearly to your guns and bibles!!!!! Ha ha…”? What guns? I don’t own a firearm and none of my associates have firearms either. Heck, I don’t think that there are more than a dozen shotguns for duck hunting here in all of upstate New York. Our Governor Andrew Cuomo assured us that firearms in the home only cause tragic childhood accidents and eventually lead to a life of crime. We believe governor Cuomo and just to be sure that we have the proper perspective, we burned all of our Bibles too!

        America is in decline and that is as it should be when the majority of the voters put the liberal candidates into positions of trust. Such voters want more government, not less. Bigger government checks and better living conditions for the disadvantaged. So what if the people who actually pay taxes have to pay even more to support such lifestyles. The middle class has too much already.

        And the Rich? Forget about them, they will flee to places like Switzerland and take their millions and billions with them. Not enough money to pay for the freebies? No problem, just print more money out of thin air like the Federal Reserve did during the Q. E. programs.

        But what are we talking about here Mike? obama “is a good man” and he will sit down and write more executive orders to put things right. As he said, he doesn’t need the Congress to do what needs to be done. I’ve got to hand it to you Mike, you certainly put things in perspective, didn’t you?

  • Dalton March 18, 2016, 5:33 am

    Well maybe its time for the people to read what the founding fathers wrote so many years ago. They made it clear, if the government goes against the people then the people need to tear down the government and install a new one

    • Frontier05 March 18, 2016, 8:10 am

      An Article Five Convention of States is gathering steam to return the nation back to the Constitution. Make sure your state signs on.

  • Concerned March 18, 2016, 5:27 am

    It is surprising to me that anyone would think that Obama would suggest anyone who was not anti-gun. We don’t need any more of those, but someone who accepts the constitution as it was written.

    • Dennis M March 27, 2016, 12:10 am

      As anti-Constitution that Obama is I do not understand why he has not been impeached.

  • randall slack March 18, 2016, 5:14 am

    They can put anyone they want in the Supreme Court who is anti-gun.
    And they can rule all they want against the Second Amendment.
    We the People have the final say in this.
    We own the Constitution we have the right to civil disobedience. We have the right to disobey any law that is Unconstitutional.

    We must start to come to a consensus that we will not comply,we will not bow, we will not break.
    You want confiscation then come and get them.

    So Gun America, the NRA, and all other Gun Rights group need to stop telling us they are going to take our rights away and we are going to have to give up some of our guns and start educating,and empowering those who dont know our Constitutional Rights to make a stand and tell these anti- gun politicians and judges.
    We Will Not Lay Down Our Arms Will Out A Fight!!!

    • Kane March 18, 2016, 10:36 am

      Are you even in the NRA?

  • USMC 0317 March 18, 2016, 4:53 am

    Since, I left the Corp and served the greatest Country in this world. I swore to protect the Constitution which makes it a living document and I will still protect this Country and the U.S. Constitution. I’m so disgusted with everything this administration has done to the people of the U.S.A. They have intruded into our medical care, immigration is a joke and the Border patrol agents work their asses off 24 hours a day. They politicized our police officers who are good people and put out the little fires that erupt daily. If it was not for our police we would be living like muslim racist pigs. We have such a huge f-ing mess to clean up. If that c-nt hillary gets elected you can bet your ass I’ll be behind my M-40 A2. We can relive the 1860’s again and for as long as it takes to cull out these muslim pigs and black lives DON’T MATTER. We need to fight for our Constitution and children to save this great Country. This garland pos can be added to the list. People need to pull their heads out of their asses and stop worrying about themselves and start working together. Soon there may not be a U.S.A.

    • Jay March 18, 2016, 6:30 am

      I strongly disagree with you USMC. The fact that anyone believes it is a living document is the liberals taught view in order to make the meaning interpreted for the times and change it willy nilly! We wouldn’t even be having this discussion if it wasn’t being driven in peoples minds that it is a so called, living document. We need to hold the constitution as written in stone, it says what it says, and doesn’t say what it doesn’t say! Ex..Like the ten commandments! It is a Legal document and can only be changed by “We The People” whom it was written for to protect us from the government who would make changes to it as though it was a organism of some kind that grows and changes with the times!

  • Dj Winters March 18, 2016, 4:28 am

    How can these nimrods be against the Second Amendment, when the use of firearms was needed to establish our Country? You can not pick which Right you wish to honor, it’s all or nothing.

    • Joe McHugh March 18, 2016, 5:44 pm

      DjWinters, the nimrods of whom you speak, are not concerned about the rebellion that led to the creation of the United States of America. They are only thinking about the tyranny that they are striving to create. Whether the injustice of King George’s reign or the misery of Karl Marx’s socialism, all tyrannies seek control of the people.

      Let’s face it, these would-be oppressors cannot begin to get serious about bringing their abominations to life until privately owned firearms are banned. obama and his Democrat lackeys understand the great truth that all authoritarians have always known, namely, you can’t abuse the inherent rights of an armed people.

      On a personal note, I am not concerned about the gun ownership issue because I don’t own a firearm. Dear readers, you believe me, don’t you?

  • Jay March 18, 2016, 3:37 am

    Sigghhh. I can’t remember the last presidential candidate I might have voted for. For too long now, a candidate got my vote but, it wasn’t FOR him, it was AGAINST somebody else. No positive change apparent this time around either.
    Frankly, as much as I hate to say this, at 60 yrs of age and failing health, I am almost glad I don’t have much longer to live. I just am sorry for my sons who are as fond of the 2nd Amendment as I am. It will go hard for them.

  • Tom Horn March 17, 2016, 10:50 am

    Bam! For all you folks on GunsAmerica who keep saying, “Gun bans and confiscation can’t happen here in the U.S.,” I say, we are just one Supreme Court Justice away. If Hillary is elected, you can count on it. These folks, Merrick Garland included, show no respect for the U.S. Constitution. To them it is just a document that needs to be updated.

    Better to put up a fence, than go looking for the cow after she’s left the barnyard. Get out and vote, urge your friends and family to do the same.

    • Dj Winters March 18, 2016, 4:35 am

      I don’t think so, if the Gobment takes one Admendment away what’s to stop them from stripping the U.S. Citizens of the rest of our Rights? The Second Admendment, that’s right! It was the Second Admendment that gives us protection against a tyrantical government, not the First, not 13th, but the Second. They might make it hard as H to get firearms and bullets or cause an outragous tax increase on the sales of all of it but the Gobment can not ban firearms.

      • JJMCD March 18, 2016, 7:38 am

        Gentemen, they have ALREADY stripped away a lot of our rights under the 4th amendment, and are working on the 5th. A true conservative wants to preserve ALL of them, regardless of how inconvenient they are to “Law Enforcement”.
        We have a whole host of issues today that are Confescatory in Government behavior, from RICO to Asset Seizure. Asset Seizure now accounts for a 10% of the revenue for most local governments. And the case for asset seizure is Civil, not criminal. That means no due process is really required.

        Add to that the latest in “Law Enforcement” actions “Against Encryption” and you see a massive creeping federalism that was far and away against the initial founders of this nation. This is Monarchy gone mad, in the 21st century.

        Now, we elect a Man who would be King.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend