Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Lawyers, Guns, and Money. Yes!

This summer the U.S. Supreme Court ruled squarely under the Second Amendment for the first time in 127 years.

Smith & Wesson is celebrating the occasion with the Heller v. D.C Commissioner Commemorative Revolver:

"We at Smith & Wesson are pleased to honor the six original plaintiffs in the case while at the same time offering to consumers a firearm that will help in the preservation and protection of the Second Amendment," said Tom Taylor, Vice President of Marketing for Smith & Wesson.

Wait, what?

Does Mr. Taylor expect owners of the Heller commemorative revolver to start shooting people in furtherance of the Second Amendment? Will intruder-shootin', freedom lovin' Americans be able to pay for it with their tax refund checks? Exactly how much pleasure may I extract from pointing fingers at the clowns on both sides of this circus parade, before I become a bad person?

Labels:

11 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Arguably the act of "keep[ing] and bear[ing] arms" alone suffices to protect the Second Amendment. One doesn't actually have to shoot people.

7/22/2008 8:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What a bunch of clowns. How dare these gun-totin, freedom-lovin, cowboys celebrate vindication of their constitutional rights?

Law would be way cooler if people only fought for the good rights. I mean seriously, who could possibly get so worked up about one little Amendment? It's not like the D.C. gun ban violated a quasi-protected liberty interest emanating from penumbras of the other Amendments. Geez.

7/22/2008 10:12 AM  
Blogger Toney said...

As a fellow Idahoan, and a lover of guns, I have to admit (for the first time) that I was a little disappointed in the ruling. It's always frustrating when courts won't just suck it up and give us some definitions, some guidelines, other than "this ban on guns isn't allowed".

Stop copping out! That's what checks and balances are for! If you make the wrong decision, Congress will act swiftly and expediently to correct it (that took everything I had to type that with a straight face).

7/22/2008 10:25 AM  
Blogger Patrick Bageant said...

I'm with Toney. I love my firearms as much as the next guy, but the whole DC thing is just hilarious. I mean, a commemorative revolver? Really?

7/22/2008 10:32 AM  
Blogger Danny Zee said...

"a firearm that will help in the preservation and protection of the Second Amendment." Come on guys, gun loving or not, that is just a funny thing to say. Its probably not a new idea—owning guns not to protect yourself, but to protect the right to own guns—but I hadn't heard it stated so bluntly before.

People don't protect the Constitution, guns do!

7/22/2008 12:28 PM  
Blogger ibz said...

Without necessarily disagreeing with any of the above, I must confess: I want one. And I bet that at least some of you do, too.

7/22/2008 3:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gun manufacturers selling guns, to make money?! Craziness.

Still not as sexy as the engraved set of forceps I got in celebration of Stenberg v. Carhart. Don't mention Gonzalez or I'll stick my fingers in my ears and start humming.

7/22/2008 10:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rather have a S&W 327 TRR8 then a little 442.

7/22/2008 11:01 PM  
Blogger Beetle Aurora Drake said...

Did anyone pick up any commemorative Lawrence v. Texas gear?

7/23/2008 12:13 AM  
Blogger Armen Adzhemyan said...

She did.

7/23/2008 12:25 AM  
Blogger Armen Adzhemyan said...

But on a less serious note, as a lot of these comments imply, WHY haven't other industries created commemorative SCOTUS products? Sports season after sports season the fine folks at Sports Illustrated come up with commemorative editions of their magazine to drum of subscriptions and to celebrate the win of XYZ team in the ABC tournament, championship, playoff, etc. Enterprising Boalties, let's hear your ideas.

7/23/2008 12:33 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home