None of the April 11 editions of the network morning shows: ABC's "Good Morning America," CBS's "The Early Show," and NBC's "Today," noted the April 10 unanimous ruling of the California Supreme Court striking down a San Francisco handgun ban.
I mean, what other reasons could this possibly be newsworthy besides that:
- We're in the thick of a presidential election year and the candidates, particularly the Democratic ones, have not been thoroughly questioned on this issue
- California is as "blue" as they come with politics, with the judicial temperment to match, and yet came up with a ruling favorable to conservatives
- The ruling was unanimous
- The U.S. Supreme Court has heard and will soon rule on a case involving the constitutionality of the District of Columbia handgun ban. That case could be a landmark 2nd Amendment ruling and will be sure to make waves in the presidential landscape given the reticence of Democrats to pick fights on the issue in the past eight years.
I guess something's gotta give when you have only two hours to cover the news of the day. Heaven forbid it be a preachy segment about wasteful use of diapers.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Well dang me....I can't
April 11, 2008 - 17:13 ET by bigtimerWell dang me....I can't believe the Calif. Supreme Court ruled this way...maybe they are sick and tired of all their rulings being overturned by the SC...it can't be they follow the Constitution suddenly...lol
As to the msm, this figures doesn't it...the msm managed to keep the cameras all day on SF and the passing of the torch or non-passing of it yesterday, but zilch on this very important ruling.
Figures now doesn't it.
Absolutely disgusting too by the way, this is the first I have heard of this.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Prescriptions
April 11, 2008 - 17:37 ET by Wilbur747Maybe they're just now using their prescriptions for 'medicinal' marijuana and finding out there is another reality from the liberal one.
Will liberal Big Media also
April 11, 2008 - 18:04 ET by deerjerkydaveWill liberal Big Media also turn the other way when the US Supreme Court slaps down the DC gun ban?
As much as liberals hate it, our constitution gives people the right to bare arms. Perhaps they've forgotten that the people have the power in this country, not the government.
Deerjerkydave:
April 11, 2008 - 18:14 ET by iveseenitall"...people have the power in this county, not the government"-- Hear! Hear! I pray to God it stays that way.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Some concern...
April 11, 2008 - 18:39 ET by Wilbur747I do have great concern about the SC ruling on the DC gun ban. It's been presented (in support of the DC ban) that states should be allowed to enact "reasonable" gun limits (control).
I'm concerned that even though the SC may strike the ban down, the words "reasonable control" may leave a HUGE loophole for lib gungrabbers.
What is "reasonable control" when your city/county/state is run by libdems?
If the SC agrees with the "reasonable control" arguement, to a libdem that means total ban or huge restrictions on carry, storage, use, etc., and we can't do anything about it as it was an SC ruling.
My county (Pima county in Tucson) is run by libdems, but the majority of AZ is conservative and our governor, Janet Napolo-Reno (Napolitano) is a big-time libdem. Her idea of reasonable is a total ban.
The only reason she hasn't singed any bans/restrictions is that she knows she'll NEVER get re-elected.
If you want to see
April 12, 2008 - 11:07 ET by ahusserIf you want to see "reasonable" gun control. Check out the Socialist Republic of Maryland and what they deem reasonable. Continual stumbling blocks in the right even to own a firearm much less carry one is thrown in the way of law abiding citizens in this state. Carry permits are almost impossible to obtain. I am willing to be reasonable. I don't object too much to background checks and waiting periods because it shouldn't affect the law abiding citizen. But I believe all should have the right to carry. It is funny that states that have right to carry concealed laws have not had a jump in murders and crime (probably the opposite) especially by those allowed to carry otherwise the news would have been jammed down out throats by the anti-gun crowd. The silence is deafening. The gun-free zones are the real killers.
The funny thing is...
April 12, 2008 - 13:06 ET by Wilbur747that Vermont, a bastion of liberalism has not only an open carry law, but any citizen can carry concealed WITHOUT a license or permit! I haven't heard of any real violence there. If find it interesting that when Howard Dean was guv, he didn't tighten restrictions.
The book 'More Guns, Less Crime' is outstanding and has documented facts and figures that prove the safest places to live are those where law abiders can carry and get concealed permits.
Here in AZ, if your record is clean and you attend a course, you can get a concealed permit easily. Funny, I don't see the "wild west shoot outs" the libdems say will happen when people can be armed.
If libdems can't outright ban guns, they will make so many gun-free zones that you won't even be able to walk down the street with your gun.
One initiative here was to make a 1 mile area around churches, schools (1000 feet now), G'mint buildings and parks gun-free zones. I can't go 2 blocks without running into one of these. It would have served tha same purpose as a ban and side stepping the right to carry law. Thankfully it failed.
I just can't figure out, if libdems are so 'enlightened', then how come they can't get it into their heads that if a guy's going to commit a crime, he won't care about any bans or gun-free zones.
deleted...double post
April 12, 2008 - 13:46 ET by Wilbur747double post
Move along....nothing to
April 11, 2008 - 18:20 ET by motherbeltMove along....nothing to see here.....
It's just not that big a deal...they would have treated it the same way if the ban were upheld....
NOT!
That's right...
April 11, 2008 - 18:56 ET by Wilbur747we've got bigger things to worry about.
News topics to report about:
We think Bush may have said something we think is dumb.
Cheney and the reflection in his glasses.
The helping of those poor victims of the evil mortgage companies.
Global warming and NOT cooling is taking place. Al Gore (oooh, ahhhh!) said so. Besides the debate is over.
Pamela Anderson's breakup. (Let's get to this one people!)
And OMG I almost forgot! We NEED to know NOW who was tossed from American Idol!
Obama is soooo dreamy!
Now, get back to work and write some REAL stories!
We think Bush may have
April 11, 2008 - 19:32 ET by Jack BauerWell he did legally support the District of Columbia in the recent SCOTUS appeal hearing seeking to reinstate and uphold its handgun ban.
That was pretty dumb, don't you think?
Well...
April 11, 2008 - 21:21 ET by Wilbur747I was thinking about his little verbal goofs that the media loves to capitalize on but now that you mentioned it, you may be right. Considering that as the Boss, he 'legally' supports his attorneys, much like the SecDef is responsible for what his generals say.
I know that that DC v Heller includes the official Gov'mint brief, and I have a copy of the original brief, but since the P and VP are hardened gun owners I have to question whether the Prez was actually ionvolved in the G'mint attorney's brief prep.
The VP stated his disapproval with the court brief, as did many, many, many senators and congressfolks.
I understand that 'someone' asked the G'mint attorney to change much of the original wording, and it was.
During the Clinton reign, there were G'mint briefs to SCOTUS that Billy later questioned and was disappointed at the ultimate ruling.
Bottom line, I don't think the G'mint attorney vets his briefs to every Prez.
LA Times missed the CA SC gun decision?
April 11, 2008 - 19:41 ET by Gary HallSearching in the moment, I see nothing in the LA Times (and I note their new search engine sucks). I see nothing but silence.
Deafening isn't it
April 11, 2008 - 22:03 ET by bigtimerDeafening isn't it Gary?
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Wow! This is great news.
April 11, 2008 - 21:59 ET by amberWow! This is great news.
They're Not Liberals...
April 11, 2008 - 22:22 ET by unkeeafCan we please stop calling these people liberals? They're socialists - plain and simple. That is what they are called in Europe and that is what they are. Anti-capitalist, big government loving swine.
But look at the bright side...
April 12, 2008 - 10:14 ET by HumblepieWhen the earth's temp. goes up and we're forced to cannibalism, only conservatives will own guns.
During this time with political correctness at its zenith, I reserve the right to let you know you're an idiot.