Nixon leads posse of Repubs in lauding High Court’s pro-gun decision
So far there seems to be unanimity among all the Missouri politicians offering comments on the U.S. Supreme Court decision today that overturns a Washington D.C. ban on handguns.
All of the Missouri statements so far have signaled agreement.
Here’s the statements, some of them excerpts because of length. They are listed in order of being received.
The times are noted, since some were fired off within minutes — if not seconds — of the court’s ruling:
Attorney General Jay Nixon, D (9:30 a.m.)
“Today the United States Supreme Court affirmed what we in Missouri
have long held as a mainstream value: that the Second Amendment
guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. I am pleased that
the Court recognized that the Washington, D.C. gun ban went far beyond
what most Americans consider reasonable in the regulation of firearms. I
continue to support Missouri’s public safety measures to insure that
guns don’t fall into the hands of criminals. But it is equally
important that we continue to recognize and protect our firearms rights
secured by our Founding Fathers.”
He noted that in February, “Nixon and 30 other attorneys general filed a brief with
the U.S. Supreme Court urging it to adopt the position that the Second
Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.”
9th District congressional candidate Blaine Luetkemeyer, R (9:38 a.m.)
“The Supreme Court’s decision is a major victory for our rights as Americans and further increases my resolve to ensure that Congress stays out of the way of those who lawfully enjoy those rights. The people of the 9th District can be sure that as a member of Congress I will be a vocal and active opponent against those that would seek to take our Second Amendment rights away.”
Gov. Matt Blunt, R (10:29)
“I commend this landmark decision today by the United States Supreme Court affirming the freedom and right of law-abiding Americans to own firearms. Today’s decision is a blow to those groups and liberal politicians who oppose gun rights and who seek to sabotage the Second Amendment rights of Missourians and all Americans.
“Missourians maintain a deep reverence for the freedoms guaranteed by the Second Amendment. My administration has a proud record of supporting those freedoms for law-abiding Missourians. We understand that our Constitution and Bill of Rights were created to limit the powers of government, not the rights of the people.”
Blunt noted that today, he “is signing House Bill 2034, a pro-Second Amendment package at stops in Boonville at River Hills Sporting Clays and in Park Hills at a shooting range. The bill protects Missourians’ access to ranges and strengthens the state’s firearms laws.”
State Treasurer Sarah Steelman, R (10:41 a.m.)
“I commend the United States Supreme Court for affirming one of the most important freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Americans should have the right to defend themselves against violent criminals and hunting and recreational shooting are part of the traditional Missouri values we hold dear.
I will continue to do everything I can to defend our Constitution as Missouri’s next Governor.”
State Sen. Michael Gibbons, R and a candidate for attorney general ( 10:42)
His statement began by observing that his “commitment to the Second Amendment is well-known as he cast the deciding vote that allowed law-abiding Missourians to carry weapons for protection.”
“This is a major victory for Missourians and I strongly commend the Supreme Court for its common-sense ruling on this very important legal issue,” Gibbons said. “As Attorney General, I will work to protect our Second Amendment rights and enforce Missouri laws that give our citizens the right to carry concealed weapons, prevent their firearms from being confiscated during natural disasters, and make sure that they can defend their homes from intruders.”
State Rep. Bob Onder, R and 9th District candidate (10:51)
“The right to bear arms is no less part of our Bill of Rights than the right to freedom of speech or religion. For far too long, responsible gun-owners in our country have seen legal elites attempt to trample their constitutional rights. This decision stops the anti-gun zealots cold in their tracks, and puts real meaning back into the Second Amendment. It ensures that American homeowners will always maintain their constitutional and God-given rights to self-defense.”
“As usual, Justice Scalia has written a brilliant opinion,” he continued. “We need more judges like him and Justice Thomas - judges who understand that words have meaning and that their role is not to make decisions based on the plain meaning of words rather than their own personal policy preferences.”
Onder added that he “has been a hunter since his uncle bought him a single shot .22 at the age of 12, and continues that family hunting tradition every year at a family farm on the Adair-Sullivan county line in northeast Missouri. He is a 30 year Life Member of the National Rifle Association who holds a conceal-and-carry permit….”
State Rep. Sam Page, D and a candidate for lieutenant governor (12:08 p.m.)
“I completely support today’s Supreme Court decision upholding the
right of law-abiding citizens to own firearms and overturning the
District of Columbia law banning ownership of handguns. The right to
own firearms clearly is enshrined by the Second Amendment as an
individual right and the Court has removed any legal doubts regarding
the issue.”
U.S. Sen. Christopher (Kit) Bond, R (12:36 p.m.)
“This decision sends a clear message – Americans have a constitutionally protected individual right to bear arms. Law-abiding gun owners across America can rest easy tonight knowing that the government cannot take their guns away or leave them unprotected in their own homes.”
U.S. Rep. Kenny Hulshof, R and candidate for governor (2:11 p.m.)
“This is a great day for all Americans, as the highest court in the land has once and for all come down on the side of personal liberty,” Hulshof said.
He noted that he is “a lifelong hunter and gun owner” and “was one of 250 congressmen who, along with the vice president and 55 senators, signed onto the amicus brief earlier this year, which was backed by the National Rifle Association and sent to the Supreme Court in favor of overturning the ban.”
“…The right to bear arms has been one of our country’s longest-held but contentious rights,” Hulshof said. “The Supreme Court decision today resolutely affirms that the Second Amendment is an individual right and belongs to all Americans.”
U.S. Rep. Todd Akin, R (3:04 p.m.)
<p “Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court is a major victory for those who believe that the rights outlined by the Constitution are just as right and relevant today as the day that thefounding document was penned.
“Today’s decision vindicates the common sense notion that the right to bear arms as afforded in the Constitution is meant for every law abiding, responsible citizen for the purpose of hunting as well as a means of protection of ones home and family.”
I thought “arms” referred to either knives, bike chains, pillow cases full of doorknobs, nuclear warheads, or other weapons you would traditionally hunt with on the Adair-Sullivan county line.
“As usual, Justice Scalia has written a brilliant opinion”
Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich added his two cents in an e-mailed statement at 12:11 p.m.
“I want express my extreme disappointment with the decision issued today by the Supreme Court. Every day, around the country, too many lives are lost to senseless gun violence. The Courts decision today will only add to the pain that parents, classmates and communities are forced to endure. It will also put more police officers at risk. I am an advocate for common sense gun laws. Gun laws that save lives, protect communities and offer greater safety protections for police officers. I look forward to working the Illinois General Assembly to provide additional protections for Illinois communities.”
Governor Blagojevich could be Tim Hogan’s running mate.
Governor Blagojevich needs to understand that while Illinois might be concerned with gun violence and police officer safety, Missouri is a very different state with very different concerns. In THIS state, we need the ability to conceal our AK-47s in case we run into urban gangs in small towns.
Thank goodness Blagojevich is on the other side of the Mississippi . His kind need to stay there .
I would like to see Bob do a clone hunting tour of rural Missouri. Talk about some killer photo ops!
The Founding Fathers understood the importance of defending one’s self, family, property and our amended rights from the intrusion upon those rights from unlimited government, that is why it is the second amendment. The absolute reason behind a right of citizens to own arms and form militias is to overthrow the government when the government itself becomes to powerful and acts as a tyrant. The day that the government tries to take our arms away is the day the citizens will most need our arms to overthrow the government and restore the constitution to its original intent.
Hey, Nick you dogmeat bunghole sniffer!
I have written on this and many other posts that unless there is an individual right to bear arms, there is no Second Amendment and predicted (and welcomed) the opinion as written. Our individual rights to keep and bear arms are more essential now than at any other time since the American Revolution to protect ourselves against tyranny!
The DC ban didn’t infringe on people’s right to defend themselves in their homes. the DC residents could have shotguns and rifles which are much more deadly and effective at defending a stationary position (aka a home).
People still aren’t able to carry handguns outside of their homes in DC, oh how are they going to defend themselves then?!
Scalia writing the opinion only guarantees that its full of meanderings and will be rendered impotent by future courts that will cut the decision into useable pieces (which there probably won’t be that many)…
“the DC residents could have shotguns and rifles which are much more deadly and effective at defending a stationary position (aka a home).”
Except for the fact they had to be broken down or trigger locked, and in no way could they be loaded. Quite a feat, someone breaks into your house and you ask them to kindly wait while you assemble your shotgun, load it, then fire on them. Maybe in libtard fantasy land that might work (with all the other stupid libtard ideas), but not in the real world. By the way, if handguns were outlawed in DC, why where there so many handgun homicides?
Mike:
The DC law was overexcessive. It banned handguns, which is an infringement on the right to keep and bear arms. Further, it required all shotguns and rifles to be disassembled or with an approved trigger lock-extraordinarily ineffective if someone breaks into your house.
And, let me ask you a question. How is a rifle or shotgun better at defending your home? You are correct when talking about stationery positions, but that would be if you can see an intruder coming at long distances. A rifle or shotgun would be much harder to move with inside a home, and isn’t as stable as a handgun. The kick on a handgun would be minimal. On a rifle, it would be much more intense.
Since Jay was first does that mean he will get the NRA endorsement? I am guessing that since they are not partisan they will support Jay and his pro-gun stance.
the NRA is as non-partisan as the NRCC
The NRA will not support Jay Nixon because he is a phony. He opposed Missouri’s right to carry law. He is no friend of those who support the 2nd Amendment. The NRA DOES support Democrats who are pro Second Amendment, however there are very few Democrats who honor our right to keep and bear arms. If you want to talk about partisan, the unions ALWAYS endorse Democrats, no matter how incompetant and inexperienced and anti gun the Democrat candidate.
A rifle is not a good self defense weapon for the home!!! Rifles are meant for longer distance shooting. Many Democrats do not know the difference between shotguns and rifles. They just like to shoot off their mouths (no pun intended). Hillary claimed to have gone duck hunting with a rifle! Duck hunting is down with shotguns. Furthermore, a shotgun can be hard to pick up in a flash when your life is in danger. A handgun is much easier to handle quickly. Apparently Democrats are not pro choice when it comes to what law abiding citizens are allowed to protect themselves with.
This from Peter Kinder’s staff, at 6:29 p.m.:
In a stunning and transparent act of hypocrisy, Democrat Sam Page made the outrageous claim today that he supports our Second Amendment rights BUT actually received failing grades from the National Rifle Association and consistently voted against gun rights legislation. In stark contrast to Page, Republican Lt. Governor Peter Kinder has received national recognition from the NRA for his support of Second Amendment rights.
Page this afternoon issued a ridiculous statement praising the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision protecting the individual rights of gun owners yet he failed to mention that he received a failing grade of “F” from the NRA in 2004 and 2006. Page’s hypocrisy even eclipses that of Jay Nixon, who received the “stellar” grade of “D-minus” from the NRA, which was outraged by Page’s statement.
“Sam Page is now pandering and trying to mislead Missourians about his opposition to the individual rights of gun owners under the U.S. Constitution and we are calling on Sam Page to immediately retract his ridiculous and insulting statement,” said Paul Sloca, a spokesman for Kinder. “Peter Kinder, meanwhile, is a staunch support of the rights of Missouri gun owners and has been recognized nationally for fighting for Second Amendment rights.”
Chris Cox, executive director of NRA Institute for Legislative Action, was quick to call out Page for his misleading statements and quick to praise Kinder’s stellar record on Second Amendment rights.
“A lot of politicians are trying to change their stripes on this issue and we are outraged by Sam Page’s statements because we have always found him to be staunchly anti-Second Amendment while Lt. Governor Kinder has always been a vocal supporter of our right to bear arms under the Constitution,” Cox said.
It’s nice to see Kinder and his staff climbing up on a soapbox and lecturing people. Was the person who sent out that statement a distributor of pornography to children or just secretly gay?
Jay Nixon = Liar
Sam Page = Liar
SMC… you pre-suppose the idea that there is an individual right to bear arms… read the Bill of Rights and ask yourself where the individual’s right to own firearms (when not part of a state militia) is referenced… The Supreme Court hadn’t extended the right to the individual until yesterday. If Scalia is truly a strict constructionist, then I’m perplexed by his addition to and interpretation of the words on that fateful page.
Si… the libtard idea of having trigger locks and unloaded weapons is for the protection of kids and dumbasses that leave loaded weapons about for others to steal and use in the commission of another crime. people that truly respect firearms aren’t leaving loaded weapons with no locks about their home… I’ve got unloaded shotguns with trigger locks in my home; I know that it will only take 20-30 seconds to prepare to fire. are you really advocating leaving loaded weapons about the house? if so, are you going to stay home and babysit them so that when a burglar enters your home you’ll be there to stop them from taking them for use in future crimes? just use common sense and stop trying to be sensational.
P.S. do you even have a statistic for how many of DCs homocides are handgun related? or did you read that DC had 143 ‘gun-related’ deaths last year and just saw what you wanted?
What kind of mental gymnastics did the dissenting justices have to perform in order to perceive the group right argument as even being specious? I am pleased by the ruling, but incredulous that the dissenting justices were duplicitous enough to ignore the evidence and opinionate as they did.
Mike-
I dont think that shotguns and rifles will be very effective if a intruder is already in your house. It is not like you will have warning of a break-in in time to get to “battle stations.” Fact is you cant manuver a long gun very well in the narrow hallways of a home. Not to mention the DC gun law also required that guns have trigger locks on them when there were being stored in the home. In the time it could take a person to get their weapon, and the key, and remove the trigger lock; the ability for the weapon to be any defense may have well passed. People deserve the right to have an quick and effective means to defend their family and their property.
I think Scalia hammered home the “the people” point pretty well. Maybe others might be confused, but I am pretty sure when the Constitution says “people” its talking about me.
If “people” covers some terrorist in a foriegn country shooting a gun at our troops that are trying to catch him to prevent him from blowing up another building in New York….then I am sure it probably covers honest Americans like myself living in this country too….
Although with Stevens you never know!!!!!
Timbo …”dogmeat bunghole sniffer”???
You learn that bit of class in law school?