To no one’s surprise, Justice Scalia and his Republican appointee brothers on the Court have shown a fine example of judicial activism. Personally, I think that from a historical and even a literal reading of the Constitution, it is a real stretch to find an absolute right to bear arms in the Second Amendment. And regardless of how you feel about the issue, it takes a great feat of judicial activism to overturn the will of the D.C. electorate who have been firmly against firearms possession since 1976. I wonder whether John McCain thinks this particular instance of judicial activism is one of the best or worst decisions in the Court’s history.
In referring to Scalia’s flip flop, E.J. Dionne Jr. writes,
In his intemperate dissent in the court’s recent Guantanamo decision, Scalia said the defense of constitutional rights embodied in that ruling meant it ‘will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.’ That consideration apparently does not apply to a law whose precise purpose was to reduce the number of murders in the District of Columbia.
Grave Error 
That is a great quote from Dionne.
The lie is that suppressing the right of people to defend themselves has done anything to help the murder rate in the nations capital.
The stark beauty of simple numbers:
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm
Criminals will always have guns, and only a socialist tyrant thinks “free men” don’t have a right to defend themselves against the pernicious and reprobatory.
The interesting correlation would be to see how the laws on “shock probation” and leniency have changed in accordance with the numbers, since 1960 … My bet is it would be a 1:1 ratio.
Take your mind back from the MSM before it’s too late.