D.C. Versus Heller Versus Toddlers
BY Herschel Smith
8 years, 1 month ago
In tonight’s debate, Hillary said this: “What the District of Columbia was trying to do was protect toddlers from guns.”
Here is the URL to the Heller decision. Here is the URL to the oral arguments. Extra credit to any reader who can find reference to the words “toddler,” “baby,” or “child” anywhere in the decision or oral arguments. Hint: CTRL-F works for PDF. Take it away folks.
|
|
On October 19, 2016 at 11:00 pm, Jeremy said:
Child and children is mentioned 7 times.
On October 19, 2016 at 11:24 pm, Herschel Smith said:
BLUF: Good work to do the counting, bu there is more analysis work to be done. Extra, extra credit for anyone who can connect the dots to the most recent video by the brady campaign.
I fear this is a lack of attention to detail. Where exactly in the … “decision” … did these instances appear? Or was it just Breyer’s dissent and the oral argument which tried to make a failed case for “the children” where this occurred?
You must be better prepared for test questions like this, Most college professors craft “plausible distractors” throw you off.
On October 20, 2016 at 12:29 am, Jeremy said:
You’re right, it doesn’t appear in the decision. The sole issue of the case wasn’t about gun safety. But you did say oral arguments in your article. Now you’re saying the oral arguments are irrelevant?
On October 20, 2016 at 10:41 am, Herschel Smith said:
Okay, the posing of the question was a little unfair, because I asked only for instances. But what I want folks to see is that Hillary uses “the children” (toddlers, in this instance, appealing to moms everywhere) from the Brady campaign’s most recent video release, and from the failed oral arguments, and Breyer’s failed dissent, to say what the “real” concern in the Heller case was.
Bullshit. The Heller case was decided by five justices, and written up by Scalia. Breyer’s arguments are NOT the Heller case, and don’t represent the “real concern” in Heller. The real concern was God-given rights to self defense, codified in the Second Amendment.
But she has shown everyone what she’ll do. She would have sided with Breyer. Of course she would have. We know this. If everyone else is listening, they know it too regardless of her lies that she supports the Second Amendment.
Satan whispers in her ear.
On October 20, 2016 at 7:51 am, Social Justice Paladin â„¢ (D) said:
Media Maters says the NRA is wrong about the Heller because “Justice Stephen Breyer’s dissent highlighted the accidental firearm-related deaths of children seven times”.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/10/20/nra-doesn-t-know-what-s-landmark-second-amendment-decision-it-constantly-touts/213970
Using that logic I can quote the dissent in Obergefell v. Hodges to prove it does not guarantee a right to same-sex marriage.
On October 20, 2016 at 8:28 am, Fred said:
“Rabid, gun-toting, wild eyed, pistol waving toddlers are roaming the streets, abort them all.” – Clinton