by Kurt Hofmann
Yesterday, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) reported that University of Texas law professor Calvin Johnson thinks that the Chardon, Ohio high school shooting Monday was "a typical exercise of 2d Amendment rights."
The suggestion by a University of Texas law professor that Monday’s deadly school shooting in Ohio was a “typical exercise of the Second Amendment” is an outrage, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.
Calvin Johnson teaches law at UT in Austin, and his comments appeared in an e-mail that was exposed by a reporter for the Washington Free Beacon. The story also revealed that Johnson defended the City of Chicago’s handgun ban, which SAF successfully challenged before the U.S. Supreme Court in McDonald v. City of Chicago.
As unforgivably offensive as that claim is, some deeper digging, as was done by the Washington Free Beacon, reveals that Johnson's antipathy to the Second Amendment's Constitutional guarantee of the right of the individual to keep and bear arms goes back far longer than that. In the year 2000, he found it "quite reasonable" to dismiss the Second Amendment as "historical trivia" (emphasis added)
Even repeal of the Second Amendment would not solve Prof. Johnson's problem, of course, given that since the Supreme Court's U.S. v. Cruikshank decision in 1876, the right to keep and bear arms is known to predate "the Constitution, and neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence."
Johnson's even bigger problem is that some of us won't be disarmed no matter what political maneuverings are undertaken for that purpose. How high is he willing to stack the bodies before accepting that the rights of a free people are never "trivial"?