silly gun question for Holder

[bossy22]

NYT published an OP-ed that discussed some possible questions that the senate should ask Eric Holder

here is one of the questions
2. Do you believe law-abiding Americans have an individual constitutional right to keep firearms for self-defense?

now this is just silly, the answer does not matter, nor does it tell you how he is going to handle the firearm regulation situation. he could say "no" to the question...but his belief means absolutely nothing because legally speaking we do...its like someone saying they dont believe in gravity.

I know what the question is really trying to get at..whats his views on gun control...but there are better more specific ways of asking. Asking the question in this way just makes it seem stupid and childish

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/opinion/15questions.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=volokh&st=cse

[slackmaster]

1. I wish someone would ask him about that shoulder thing that goes up

Nobody needs that for hunting deer.

[aikoaiko]

2. oy.

:spank:

I wonder if guns will come up at all.

[Mad_Cow_Disease]

3. I think it's a valid question.

In many of the new bans being introduced everyday, the AG often has a say in which firearms make "the list" and which don't.
Guns aside, the AG also say in many legal matters in much the same light.
So gaining his personal insight on a topic (especially one as divisive as firearms) is very prudent.
If the AG's actions and personal merits/beliefs meant nothing, then there wouldn't be an evaluation of his nomination.

[bossy22]

5. hmmm

"In many of the new bans being introduced everyday, the AG often has a say in which firearms make "the list" and which don't. "
and i can assure you that he/she wont have total control over that...D.C. V Heller took many options off the table.

"If the AG's actions and personal merits/beliefs meant nothing, then there wouldn't be an evaluation of his nomination. "
they mean very little in certain circumstances- such as these. Asking him whether he believes that individuals have a right to a gun for self defense is a silly waste of time. The supreme court has stated that you do have that right- so its settled law...you have the right to have a gun for self defense- regardless of how the AG feels. If he feels you dont...fine...but he can't really do anything about it...he can't just direct the justice department to start arguing that you don't since its already settled law.

AG's beliefs do play a role in the justice department...but sometimes, in certain cases they dont..those are the cases where the law is settled...such as abortion.

After D.C. V Heller the AG has limited amount of power when it comes to firearms. He could believe that handguns should be banned but he can't do a thing about it.


A better question would be something like this "what firearm regulations do you believe are constitutional with regards to the second amendment"

asking this question actually gets you useful information...because it tells you what stuff he may try to push or what scrutiny the justice department will argue when dealing with second amendment cases.

so in short...the debate is no longer about do you have a right to have a gun for self defense but how far that right extends

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

4. Would they ask do you believe in the right of Americans to be protected from unreasonable search and

seizure? Do you believe in the right of Americans to exercise freedom of speech? It is pretty silly.

David

[bossy22]

6. exactly

the debates have been settled already, there is no use wasting time bringing it up...nothing will change, its settled law

[rangersmith82]

7. Sorry this guy is a Horrible choice for AG...

He was Janet Reno's Gopher boy.....

He will bring unjust and unconstitutional laws to the gun owning Citizens of the United States.

When will our Party quit electing anti-gun people????

[Joe Steel]

8. It will remain settled law...

the debates have been settled already, there is no use wasting time bringing it up...nothing will change, its settled law

It was settled law before Scalia changed it. It will remain settled law only until someone changes it again.

[Abq_Sarah]

9. No, it wasn't

The courts had avoided dealing with the issue of an individual right.

[rangersmith82]

10. All we need is incorporation of the 2nd amendment

once we have incorporation bans will be a hard thing to implement in America.

Like I said this guy is a horrible choice for AG.

He will turn legal gun owning citizens into criminals!!!!

[gorfle]

11. So what?

the debates have been settled already, there is no use wasting time bringing it up...nothing will change, its settled law

So what? I think direct questions like this are very useful, because they provide insight into the thoughts of the person answering them.

Abortion rights have been settled by law for a long time, too, but I'd want to see all politicians anti-abortion views exposed anyway.