Miers Position on the Second Amendment
Posted on October 4, 2005
Hat tip to Volokh
Stumbled upon this one searching around the web. Perhaps it will ease some of the concern about Miers. Here is an excerpt from a 1992 article she wrote for the Texas Lawyer. In the article, she refers to three famous multiple homicides in Texas: the 1966 Texas Tower Shooting, in which a man climbed the clock tower at the University of Texas, and shot 14 people, the 1991 Killeen massacre where 23 unarmed people were shot by a man in a caferia, and another where a man murdered two judges and two lawyers in a Fort Worth courthouse.
Here is what she had to say.
How does a free society prevent” such crimes, she asked. She then explained:
The same liberties that ensure a free society make the innocent vulnerable to those who prevent rights and privileges and commit senseless and cruel acts. Those precious liberties include free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom of liberties, access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance. We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs.
I completely agree with this. She was pretty clear here that our individual rights, including the right to bear arms, should not be sacrificed in the name of crime prevention. She went on to state her opinion that preventing crime was better solved by attacking the root causes such as self esteem and social issues.
By the way, she’s pro-life too.
Wizbang has more postive notes. Cheer up folks, lets not jump to conclusions just yet.
Linked at Mudville Gazette
» Filed Under 2nd Amendment, ACLU
Trackback URL
Comments
8 Responses to “Miers Position on the Second Amendment”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
Stop the ACLU blogburst
-
More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
Wait and see if the Second Amendment gets another denied hearing or if it gets a hearing in front of SCOTUS.
The precedent has been established and the high court will not hear or rule to protect the second amendment
Wait ands see how she rules, You been hosed!
I think it’s cool that you’re not jumping to conclusions, Jay. Who knows what the President’s motivations were for this pick? There’s no doubt in my mind that whatever the reasons, they were good ones. I’m also going to reserve judgement, but I really think the timing is very strange–he should be setting down what his constituents expect and now bow down to a few extremist socialists in the democratic party like Pelosi, Kerry and that loud-mouthed Rangel.
I agree with you, Jay, now is not the time to jump to conclusions and certainly not the time to abandon the Republican Party because things didn’t go exactly our way. Leave that childish mentality and rage to the left. It’s been killing them and there’s no reason fo us to adopt this self destructive behavior. Let’s all act like conservative adults.
I think the very thing that may make Miers a good Justice is the fact that we don’t know what she’s about. Why should we After all? Justices aren’t supposed to be nominated for their views but for their knowledge of the law. Miers’ career obviously proves her qualifications. To be honest, that should be enough.
I understand that many conservatives are angry because Roberts isn’t a idealogical Justice and it seems neither is Miers. Is that so bad? Republicans have spent decades complaining about ideological justices so why is it terrible that Bush might just be doing the right thing for a change and nominating qualified, non-radical Justices?
Good post Jay!
Good catch. Good defense of the Second. Pro-life? Well, as Joe E. Brown said in “Some Like It HOT”: Nobody’s perfect
I saw this earlier too. My gut says, you trust President Bush, so give Miers a chance. The second amendment stance looks good, but we have to hope she doesn’t “grow in office.”
PS added you to the blogroll
Fabulous! I wrote an article the moment I heard the President. Well, I thought about for a while, to be honest. lol. Basically it says, “Keep your shorts on!” BTW, that’s also the title! Keep us posted! You’re doing a great job.
The Miers pick is a very shrewd one – Bush has already ensured that the Democrats who were expecting a major conservative have begun to let their guard down, especially in light of the concern that most conservatives have about Miers. My guess is that she will probably join Scalia and Thomas as the MOST conservative on the courts, which, along with Roberts, gives the President exactly what he’s looking for.