Ammo For Sale

« « Neighbor Talk | Home | More on the Omaha mall shooter » »

Deflection

Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership wants to know why there’s mention of Dred Scott in Parker/Heller. Mind you, he calls it reliance on the case. He notes that Dred Scott is one of the more infamous cases. Let’s spell out Paul’s goals here, because he won’t. First, he’s deflecting the fact that some in the pro-gun community have lately been bringing up the racist roots of gun control. And, pretty much, in Dred Scott, the court said they didn’t want no armed blacks:

It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to . . . keep and carry arms wherever they went.

The second, of course, is the subtle implication of racism. I find it funny since, you know, Paul’s goals are more in line the racist roots of gun control.

3 Responses to “Deflection”

  1. Yu-Ain Gonnano Says:

    I’m pretty sure you got that quote wrong. It must have said:

    It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as members of a militia, the right to . . . keep and carry arms wherever they went.

    After all, there’s 432 years of settled jurisprudence stating the 2A only protects militias. It’s only been a modern invention of that rogue DC court that says otherwise!

  2. SayUncle Says:

    You should use snark tags. For a second, I believed you.

  3. Yu-Ain Gonnano Says:

    Yeah, I was wondering if 432 years was enough of a tip-off.