Just Shoot Me In Johnson County

Evidently, the Johnson County Commissioners never heard of the Supremacy Clause.

Let’s just add this tidbit to the growing pile of evidence that Americans are constitutionally illiterate and seriously paranoid.


  1. Exactly. People need to understand the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. If the politicians want to amend the Constitution to allow for the ban of certain arms, they have Article 5 to do that.

  2. Everyone, even the most hard nosed gun advocate, agrees with some kind of infringement targeting some people, despite the clear language in the 2nd Amendment that prohibits “infringement”. Otherwise, they would agree that everyone be able to carry any gun, including dangerous felons, paranoid psychotic persons, children, and that the gun be a Howitzer, a bazooka or some future advanced laser weapon. That certainly could make everyone’s life more interesting. But how is it that the ones who are so focused on the 2nd Amendment can ignore the clear connection of being in a militia with gun ownership? I guess even the most hard nosed “believers” choose to define “literal interpretation” a little more differently than some others. Maybe they mean “my rights shall not be infringed, but I don’t know about yours”.

  3. There is no requirement for militia duty or membership to own a gun. Perhaps you should read some Federalist papers and D.C. v. Heller which held, “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.”

    Granted, SCOTUS gets it wrong more often than they get it right, but there are plenty of writings from the founders which back up that decision.

  4. Your premier has every intention of taking my guns. I am positive about that. I applaud the folks in Johnson county for being proactive against this power grab by your premier..oh and Im a democrat…

  5. Jeez, Sheila, one search in Wikipedia would ansewr the question:

    “The Supremacy Clause only applies if Congress is acting in pursuit of its constitutionally authorized powers.”

    Congress hasn’t the authority to implement the kind of controls that just came out of Senate Judiciary.

    Using your argument, DOMA is the law of the land.

  6. I would add that the 18th Amendment gave Congress the power to legislate “the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors”.

    The 21st Amendment removed that power.

    Yet today the federal government is heavily involved in every aspect of the production of liquor. This is the only activity in which Congress asserts an authority regarding zoning…a person cannot get a license to make liquor on one’s home property under any circumstances. If my house sat on 10 acres in the country and I built a new separate brick shed to make liquor in, I still could never get a federal permit…even though the federal government’s role in such matters has clearly been removed.

    Congress’ power is not plenary though that’s the popular misconecption. Johnson County has shifted the burden of proof to the federal government.

  7. We just had a visitor from Australia here. We got to talking about gun laws. If they have long guns they must also have a gun safe and store the bolt and ammunition separately from the gun. They cannot own semi-automatic guns. They cannot own handguns unless they belong to a pistol shooting club. They have to purchase a license for $140 and renew it every 5 years, also for $140.

    Curiously since they enacted these rules, they have not been tyrannized by their government, nor overrun with gun-bearing criminals. Firearm suicides have been cut by 74%. Homicides by firearm have decreased 27%.


  8. Pro-gun arguments often wind up with a skin of reason, arcane discussions of some legal technicality or, worse, a list of the terrible things that happen when people don’t have guns, and that ends up with name-calling and other silliness. This kind of escalation leaves me with the impression that people are scared, and use fear as the rationale to buy a load of guns to “protect” themselves from the evil government or some mythical bad guy who they are certain wants to murder them and their families. Anecdotal stories abound. In any case, it’s hard to have a sensible discussion, because you never talk people out of fear when they believe that is the most appropriate option and they sincerely believe that a gun or violence will protect them from that fear. The underlying message for these arguments is “Don’t you understand that I am afraid?”

  9. This country was brought up on the gun-totin’ image of cowboys vs Indians, cavalry riding to the rescue with guns blazing, war and western movies in theaters and on TV. Any reference to the word “control” in connection with guns is going to lead to a fight – hopefully an unarmed fight between pros and cons regarding gun control. The founding fathers could in no way predict what this country and the world would become when they were penning the Constitution and the Bill of Rights with all it’s amendments. Common sense and logic has been lost in our every day lives as well as government and big business and what individuals believe these documents mean to them. The “I want” generation now spans 2-3 generations and guns are a primary issue along with controlling women’s reproductive organs and why the rich should or should not pay their fair share of taxes. President Obama has been clear in his views on gun control since before being elected Senator in Illinois; He understands self-protection, hunters rights and genuine gun collectors. He is wise enough to know that assault rifles are not needed for self-protection or hunting just as he knows law officers are lesser armed than many criminals on the streets because it is so easy in this country to buy unnecessary arms due to lack of sensible background checks and the availability of war-level weapons by those with the cash or valid credit cards. Confiscation of currently owned guns is NOT an issue in this ongoing battle except in the minds of radicals with money – as usual – being the real basis for stopping any form of gun control.

  10. Yes, and as you imply at the beginning, the myths drive the argument, not the facts. They are, after all, evidence-free and self-evident, so people don’t think you have to prove them. But they are driven by fear and magical thinking, all of which all has a delusional flavor to it. The idea of the Hollywood narrative and Lone Ranger, shooting the gun out of the hand of the bad guy, just in the nick of time is a “Glenn Beck” memory. Just not true. Hand guns aren’t easy to shoot, and in only 18% of the cases do police hit their target. A handgun is not the easy way out of a situation that solves the problem. Furthermore, if you own a handgun, it is much more likely for you to be killed (in a suicide) or for a friend or relative to be seriously wounded or killed accidently than you killing or wounding a bad guy. You simply add on another layer of violence to situations. The myths are overturned by the facts, if it’s facts you want, but fears always trump facts. The founding fathers would probably turn over in their graves if they could know how this idea has turned into such a fear-driven monster, which attracts not just fearful people but paranoid and delusional people into the mix. If you believe Hollywood and the myths that feed it, that’s a big, and ever-present, myth to counter.

  11. A commenter above seemed to think that the Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia vs Heller recognized some sort of unlimited right to bear arms. It most definitely did NOT. To quote Justice Scalia, author of the Court’s majority opinion:

    “Of course the right was not unlimited, just as the First Amendment ’s right of free speech was not, see, e.g., United States v. Williams, 553 U. S. ___ (2008). Thus, we do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens to carry arms for any sort of confrontation, just as we do not read the First Amendment to protect the right of citizens to speak for any purpose. “

  12. Justice Scalia also wrote:

    ” Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

  13. Good point. If we agree that there should be limits, as the Justice has pointed out, the question is what those limits should be, and not to take a rigid and hostile stance, as the Johnson County Commissioners seem to have taken. The Congress has the right and obligation to establish limits. Thank you.

  14. Eugene @ 6,

    What are you talking about? DOMA IS the law of the land. I don’t like it, but it is the law, which is why states aren’t required to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states where same-sex marriage is legal.

  15. Pingback: Mtnka

Comments are closed.