Savor the progressives' apoplectic outrage over SCOTUS's Second Amendment vindication

Yesterday, the Supreme Court struck down a New York law restricting gun-carrying rights for citizens. This has been seen as the most important ruling on guns in over a decade.  The decision was 6-3 and allows more people to legally carry guns on the streets of the nation's largest cities

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the following for the majority that the Constitution protects "an individual's right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home."

In 43 States, the government issues licenses to carry based on objective criteria. But in six states, including New York, the government further conditions the issuance of a license to carry on a citizen's showing of some additional special need.

We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need.

That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant's right to confront the witnesses against him.

And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense.

The New York law, which has been in place since 1913, required citizens to specify in detail their particular need for carrying a gun in order to get a license to carry one in public.

The last landmark gun ruling issued by the court was in 2010, which upheld individual gun-ownership rights within homes on a national basis.

California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island all have similar laws that are likely to be challenged as a result of the Supreme Court ruling.

Those who supported New York's law claim striking it down will lead to more gun-related violent crime on the streets.

The news incurred the wrath of a Who's Who on the left.

Biden said he was "deeply disappointed" by the Supreme Court's decision, which he said, "contradicts both common sense and the Constitution and should trouble us all".

New York City Democrat Mayor Eric Adams said he would review other ways to restrict gun access, such as by tightening the application process for buying firearms and looking at bans at certain locations.

New York Democrat Governor Kathy Hochul, called the decision "frightful in its scope," its language "shocking" and said the court was turning "this nation and our ability to protect our citizens back to our founding fathers."

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg criticized the decision in a statement, saying it "severely undermines public safety not just in New York City, but around the country."

Democrat New York Rep. Jerry Nadler, who represents the state's 10th Congressional District, criticized the six conservative justices who voted to strike down the state's law, saying they had "endangered New Yorkers" and made them "less safe."

Showbiz 'stars' also jumped in to express their annoyance.

Bette Midler fumed against the Supreme Court:

Barbra Streisand called the ruling a disgrace

Star Trek actor George Takei was outraged:

Filmmaker Rob Reiner accused the Supreme Court of enabling murderers:

Comedian Albert Brooks attacked the Supreme Court:

Actor Jeffrey Wright also expressed displeasure:

For regular citizens, a firearm is the only affordable method of self-defense, especially in cities plagued by crime due to misgovernance by Democrat leaders. 

An elderly man's only hope against a group of violent home burglars or assailants is a firearm. At times merely firing in the air could serve as a deterrent. Taking away firearms is taking away security from citizens. It endangers lives and enables crimes such as can be theft, robbery, battery, sexual assault, murder, kidnapping, etc.

So, here's a suggestion for all those who are outraged, from Joe Biden to Jeffery Wright.

They could all prove they mean what they claim by pledging to suspend all their security.

The change could begin from the very top. Biden can order his White House security team to leave and never return. Lawmakers who supported Gun Control can pass a bill that removes all their security in Washington, their places of work, and their homes in their home state. The NYC Mayor and NY Governor can also suspend their security. Each and every Hollywood star who was outraged should give up their armed security.

If one digs deeper, this is a Marie Antoinette syndrome that has afflicted many among the rich and powerful. It seems very contagious.

During the pandemic, most of the 'elites' supported draconian lockdowns. They lived comfortably within their spacious properties and didn't care how regular people were affected. In fact, they mocked those who called for an easing of lockdowns 

They didn't care that people with meager savings, living on low-paying jobs, or running small businesses will be financially ruined if due to prolonged lockdowns. They also failed to empathize that regular people need to step out of their houses for fresh air and to socialize or for religious congregations or medical treatment. Their needs were taken care of, hence the problems faced by others were irrelevant.

This sentiment continued during the gas crisis after Russia's intervention in Ukraine. The likes of Stephen Colbert, who makes $15 million dollars per annum, bragged about not being affected because he drives a Tesla

Reacting to the shortage of baby formula, feminist Bette Midler mocked regular women by tweeting "TRY BREASTFEEDING! It's free and available on-demand." Midler had no empathy for countless women who struggle to breastfeed due to health reasons, or who must work where breastfeeding is not possible.

This demand for the seizure of guns from law-abiding citizens is merely a continuation of that mentality. While they never leave their home without multiple armed bodyguards, they want to seize all means of security from regular people.

What they are saying is 'Our lives matter, yours do not. We know what's good for you but you do not. So shut up and do as you are ordered.' The word 'irredeemable' and 'deplorable' may also be used.

The Supreme Court acted morally by standing up for the citizen's right to self-defense.

This explains why there have been threats against justices and attempts to compromise its sanctity.  The left sees the Supreme Court as an obstacle in their quest to monopolize power.

If you experience technical problems, please write to