Elena Kagan opposes Americans' Second Amendment

This is a discussion on Elena Kagan opposes Americans' Second Amendment within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Will Senate RINOs simply roll over? Why has the NRA been silent on Kagan thus far? "Did Kagan Compare the NRA with the KKK?" Did ...

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 74

Thread: Elena Kagan opposes Americans' Second Amendment

  1. #46
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Will Senate RINOs simply roll over?

    Why has the NRA been silent on Kagan thus far?

    "Did Kagan Compare the NRA with the KKK?"

    Did Kagan Compare the NRA with the KKK? - Robert VerBruggen - The Corner on National Review Online

    Did Kagan Compare the NRA with the KKK? [Robert VerBruggen]



    It has become clear that Elena Kagan, Obama’s most recent Supreme Court nominee, is no friend of gun rights, to say the least. While clerking for Supreme Court justice Thurgood Marshall in 1987, she wrote the judge that she was “not sympathetic” to a Second Amendment–based challenge to the D.C. gun ban. While serving in the Clinton administration, she wrote a memo that “paved the way for an executive order banning dozens of semiautomatic weapons,” according to the L.A. Times.

    And National Review has learned that in 1996, Kagan apparently tied the NRA to the KKK — yes, the KKK — while debating the Clinton administration’s position on a bill.

    The bill in question was the Volunteer Protection Act, which, when it was passed and signed the following year, protected some non-profits’ volunteer workers from tort liability in certain cases. The administration worried that it would apply to volunteers from unlikable non-profits.

    Two documents discovered at the William J. Clinton Presidential Library and obtained by National Review suggest that Kagan was involved in these discussions. One does not contain her name, but the handwriting appears to be hers. (You can see an example of Kagan’s handwriting here.) It has the name of administration colleague Fran Allegra at the top, and lists two “Bad guy orgs” that might be covered — the NRA and the KKK.

    The second does have Kagan’s name on it; it is a memo from Allegra to Kagan. Allegra reports that he checked the IRS’s “Cumulative List of Organizations Described in Section 170(c)” — the list of tax-exempt organizations, which, he says, are the only organizations the bill would cover — and that neither the NRA nor the KKK was on it. “If you have other names you want me to run down in the Cumulative List, I would be glad to check them out,” he adds, suggesting that Kagan requested the initial check of the NRA and the KKK.

    Is Kagan so hostile to gun rights that she would compare the top gun-rights organization in the United States with a viciously racist hate group? It sure looks that way. We look forward to her explanation.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    Ex Member Array HoustonRaven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    118

    SCOTUS Nominee Compares NRA with the KKK

    Outrageous.

    I, along with others on this board, have their issues with the NRA but I do not think anyone here would make such a comparison.

    Did Kagan Compare the NRA with the KKK? - Robert VerBruggen - The Corner on National Review Online

  4. #48
    Member Array hdawson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    191

    Cool

    Nothing there to be concerned with except someone's imagination.

  5. #49
    Distinguished Member Array P7fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texan in NWFlorida
    Posts
    1,588
    Quote Originally Posted by hdawson View Post
    Nothing there to be concerned with except someone's imagination.
    Trying to understand your response.
    If you're alluding to Robert VerBruggen's 'imagination', I'd say he is making a logical point in addressing her concerns and opinions as it relates to her associating the NRA with the KKK.

    If you're alluding to Kagen, then I'd say there is much to be concerned about. Her views on this and how 'free speech can and should be controlled' concerns me greatly. I'd even go as far as to say they scare the h*ll out me. There's no way I want her on SCOTUS.


    "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson

    "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage

    GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself

  6. #50
    VIP Member Array automatic slim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    The western edge of The Confederacy
    Posts
    2,198
    What do you expect from an Obama nominee ? Change we can believe in...
    "First gallant South Carolina nobly made the stand."
    Edge of Darkness

  7. #51
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,046

    SCOTUS Nominee Compares NRA with the KKK

    Hmmm.....KKK was part of the history behind gun control--keeping firearms from former slaves....yet this "academic" compares these people to proponents of a civil right? Sounds like she can't make a coherant thought....loony tunes
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  8. #52
    VIP Member Array Hiram25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wyoming, DE
    Posts
    10,969
    We sure do not want her on the SCOTUS!
    Hiram25
    You can educate ignorance, you can't fix stupid
    Retired DE Trooper, SA XD40 SC, S&W 2" Airweight
    dukalmighty & Pure Kustom Black Ops Pro "Trooper" Holsters, DE CCDW and LEOSA Permits, Vietnam Vet 68-69 Pleiku

  9. #53
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    "willingness to substitute those [strong liberal views for sound legal judgment.

    Kagan Docs on Whitewater & Paula Jones Liveshots

    SNIP

    SESSIONS STATEMENT:

    “I remain deeply concerned that Ms. Kagan’s records will not be fully produced in time for the Committee to conduct a proper review. With just over two weeks until the hearing, we are still waiting on nearly 70,000 pages of documents containing Ms. Kagan’s email records from her time in the Clinton White House.

    “I am also concerned that so many of the documents already provided are being hidden from public view. In the first batch, approximately 200 pages were set aside by the Clinton Library as ‘Committee Confidential.’ Today, the public and the press have been denied access to another 1,351 pages of material. Additionally, we have learned that another 500 pages of material are being withheld from both the Committee and the public alike.

    “Measures must be taken to ensure that documents are being withheld only for appropriate reasons and that nothing necessary to Ms. Kagan’s evaluation before the Committee—and before the public—is being unnecessarily kept from public view.

    “We are also still waiting on material from the Department of Defense relating to Ms. Kagan’s decision as Dean of Harvard Law School to discriminate against military recruiters and remove them from the campus recruiting office. These actions, in defiance of federal law, required intervention from the Department of Defense. I asked that records relating to the DOD’s contact with Harvard be provided no later than today.

    “A good portion of Ms. Kagan’s record has still not been provided to the Committee. But based on what we already know from her memos as a Supreme Court clerk, her time in the Clinton White House, and her controversial tenure as Dean of Harvard Law School, it is clear that Ms. Kagan has demonstrated both strong liberal views and a willingness to substitute those views for sound legal judgment.

    Given this record, and the fact that Ms. Kagan has such sparse legal experience, I am concerned about whether Ms. Kagan will suddenly be able to set aside the political agenda that has defined such a large portion of her career.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  10. #54
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Our form of government,by far the best that the world has ever seen, works only if it is administrated by moral men.

    If it is administrated by immoral men, then it will cease to work as it was intended.

    Whether you are moral or immoral, your party affiliation will not matter. Your personal views will be reflected in what you say, what you do, how you think and how you interpret things.

    A moral man will interpret things differently than an immoral man.

    The real issue here is morality.

    Ask yourself this...are those running our country, from the President on down to the lowliest mayor in the smallest town in America, moral or immoral?

    When those that are immoral become greater than those that are moral, the system will cease to work for the benefit of the common citizen.

    Are we there yet?

    If not, I'd say we are pretty danged close.
    Yes indeed. Morality vs getting re-elected. It stopped being for the people a long time ago. There all standing there with their hand out under the guise of "This will better my community." Yea right. Pinky and the Brain. "I WANT TO RULE THE WORLD"
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  11. #55
    Member Array SenileDavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denton, TX
    Posts
    153
    My 2 cents:

    I get so damn F-ing tired of hearing this crap.

    Neither party can really say that they have always acted in favor to the 2nd amendment.

    This reminds me of all the idiots that went berserk and stockpiled ammo in late 2008 "Obama is gonna take our guns.. he's gonna stick serial # on ammo... the sky is falling... everyone HURRY and get your CHL!!"... etc. Nothing happened, other than causing a huge shortage that lasted months.

    Hmmmm... kinda like Y2K!

    Nothing will piss me off more than: Being classified, stereo-typed as something I'm not, or discriminated against from all things POLITICAL VIEWS.

    I'm a proud American, gun owner, Pro 2 A, NRA member, Supporter for our US military and a DEMOCRAT. I'm just as much (if not more) a gun totting SOB as any republican in here. So to all those "Liberal haters" that out of ignorance think we are all anti-gun... you can't be more wrong. I tell fellow republican texans: "Funny, you guys think liberals are so anti-2 A... yet we strive to become more like the BLUE state of Vermont that is OPEN CARRY".

    I'm a Blue-Steel Democrat and proud of it too! (I also own the domain www.bluesteeldemocrats.com)
    "Someday someone may kill you with your own gun but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty."

    "Leave the gun, take the cannoli."

  12. #56
    Member Array SenileDavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denton, TX
    Posts
    153
    OMG!! Look at this!!!
    What is this world coming to???

    Ohio Democrat receives NRA endorsement - Decision 2010- msnbc.com
    "Someday someone may kill you with your own gun but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty."

    "Leave the gun, take the cannoli."

  13. #57
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by SenileDavid View Post
    OMG!! Look at this!!!
    What is this world coming to???

    Ohio Democrat receives NRA endorsement - Decision 2010- msnbc.com
    SenileDavid

    Check out Virginia politics.

    VCDL endorses "D"s, "I"s, "L", etc.

    VCDL rejoiced this past year when a number of anti-RKBA "R"s were replaced by a number of pro-RKBA "D"s. We've even protested a "R" with an NRA "A" rating -- because he doesn't walk the talk.

    I don't care what letter follows the name. What counts is how they vote -- or in this case interpret the Law-of-the Land.

    However, in this case Kagan is looking very anti-RKBA.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  14. #58
    Member Array SenileDavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denton, TX
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveH View Post
    However, in this case Kagan is looking very anti-RKBA.
    That's what they said about Obama, Democrats, All Liberals, Big Foot and the frickin' leprechauns....

    Bottom line: We'll just have to wait and see...

    Talk is cheap.
    "Someday someone may kill you with your own gun but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty."

    "Leave the gun, take the cannoli."

  15. #59
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,590

    re: No way to tell

    Quote Originally Posted by SenileDavid View Post
    That's what they said about Obama, Democrats, All Liberals, Big Foot and the frickin' leprechauns....

    Bottom line: We'll just have to wait and see...

    Talk is cheap.
    There really is no way to tell. For example, she might well personally be anti RKBA, but also personally likely to vote to incorporate 2A as has been done with the rest of the BOR. If that step gets taken, then
    2A, whatever it is, becomes the law of the whole land; unlike now.

    At that point, and after, the courts will have to grapple with exactly where the boundaries are. There is no telling where the boundaries will eventually get drawn, but you can be pretty darn sure you won't be able to own a personal Howitzer without some hoops to jump through.

    Whether or not you will be able to carry a .45 without a license also seems problematic. Federal courts in general, and through all of our history, have not been especially pro-2A in the broad way many here would like them to be.

    Again, this conservative court had an opportunity to really do something in Heller, and they chose to do very little. Nothing changed much in D.C., and I don't think the Supremes are going to change much when the Chicago ruling comes out later. They will, whether lib or conservative, dem or repub., tinker on the edges but not upset a whole apple cart and 220 years of jurisprudence on this issue.

  16. #60
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,885
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Why do discussions as this one usually end up with the dichotomous/black-white option of either, " the government has to fear the people," or, "the people have to fear the government?"
    Why not ask Thomas Jefferson - he wrote that. Seems that Jefferson thought liberty was defined as the government being in fear of the people. Understand that the word fear probably had a slightly different meaning then than it does today, more like in the KJV where it is closer to respect than all out fear as we understand it today.

    This is a key issue in understanding the founding father's intent in the constitution - you have to understand the words the way that they understood them. Also, you have understand the hermeneutic approach being taken by those who interpret the constitution. Does the meaning of the text come from the author (constructionists), the text or the reader (living document theory)?

    If you believe that the author had a specific idea in mind and that gives the text its meaning, then you have to understand what the author meant when he wrote it to understand the text. If you believe that the author’s intent is irrelevant and that the meaning comes from what you understand the text to say, then you can come up with a variety of different interpretations over time or at the same time. James Madison was pretty clear on his thoughts on constitutional interpretation “if the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation be not the guide in expounding it, there can be no security … for a faithful exercise of power.” He was a founding father and a constructionist.

    The real argument is whether you believe that the authors of the Constitution had a thought or set of thoughts they were trying to convey to their political progeny as the framework for government or whether you believe that the document is living and breathing and open to reinterpretation over time.

    Regardless of your hermeneutic approach, you have to figure out how to apply the Constitution to changing times, i.e., the founding fathers did not have to worry about how the law impacted the internet, or airplane travel, etc. The difference in the constructionist and living document camps is the understanding of where the authority to determine the meaning of the words of the Constitution lies.
    It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

    You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Elena Kagan at gun range???
    By DaveH in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 25th, 2010, 08:34 PM
  2. Halloran Opposes Proposed Rule Amendment Regarding Gun Licenses
    By mrreynolds in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: September 26th, 2010, 02:59 PM
  3. Fight Elena Kagan nomination at SCOTUS
    By jfl in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: July 1st, 2010, 10:38 PM
  4. NRA Issues Gag Order to Its Board Members on Anti-Gun Elena Kagan Hearings
    By Sgt Z Squad in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: June 30th, 2010, 08:53 PM
  5. Second Amendment Protects All Americans, Supreme Court Told
    By JonInNY in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 18th, 2009, 10:01 AM

Search tags for this page

elena kagan opposing american second amendment

Click on a term to search for related topics.