Unrelated site business: A rise in recurring site downtime issues has prompted me to consider changing hosting companies, so the update is in a holding pattern until all the options are reviewed and a decision is made (sorry). We are not, however, waiting to find out who last week’s comment of the week winner is.
Ian Underwood.
Congrats to Ian (Again), whom I will now have to not pick for reasons we all understand. His comments always tend to be well thought out and excellent. Readers tend to vote for him if I give them the option.
We want to spread the love around, but we do love Ian’s input.
Here’s the comment!
First, note how concerned youare about ‘infringing on the rights of innocent, law-abiding citizens’.
Second, go back and check Part 1, Article 2-a of the state constitution. It protects the right to keep and bear arms… for what group of people? Innocent, law-abiding citizens? Or all persons?
The other day, I saw someone who should know better make the blanket statement that ‘criminals forfeit their constitutionally protected rights after they have committed a crime and been convicted by a jury’.
Really? Do they forfeit the right to freedom of speech? Freedom of religion? Freedom from warrantless searches? Freedom to enter into contracts, or have children? Freedom to travel?
No, they don’t. Why not? Why do they lose somerights, but not others? Because we just let judges make things up on the fly, and call whatever they say ‘the Constitution’.
Conservatives who have spent decades beggingfor things like HB1711 are now acting surprised and outraged because they’re getting what they asked for:
All of this comes back to what I said the first time I testified at a bill hearing: If the legislature is going to just ignore the state constitution, why shouldn’t the people just ignore the legislature?
