Gnomon, if one was to assume that Obama was able to appoint like minded judges to the SC, you would have to agree that the SC can and likely would interpret the 2cd in such a way as to likely curtail firearm ownership from how it exists today. Impossible to know how much but it would be different. It is within their rights as the SC to do so.
The point I was trying to make is that interpretation rests in the hands of a very small number of people, not the much larger group of gun owning Democrats.
And I agree that yahoos don't do anyone, even themselves, any favours.
I'll have to get that issue of the New Yorker. Always a good read.
Very true - but it's to some extent a myth that one can appoint "conservative" (whatever that is) or "liberal" (whatever that is) justices and expect them to vote in a predictable way. Especially on social issues - and gun rights is a social issue. Just look at the expectation regarding how the current Court might vote on the Arizona immigration laws. It really isn't an"us" vs "them" situation but is far more nuanced.
The New Yorker article has a good summary of gun laws in the US from the early 19th c on - it also clarifies (at least to me) how the NRA changed in the last half of the 20th c. The NRA of today isn't the NRA of 40 years ago.
