Sonia Sotomayor’s protection detail shoot a would-be carjacker near her home
Back in 2010, Sonia Sotomayor, Barack Obama’s “wise Latina woman,” — a person so obviously superior to a sheltered “white male” who doesn’t have any valuable life experience because he’s faced no adversity — concurred with a dissenting Supreme Court opinion, written by Stephen Breyer which argued this, reported via an article at Fox News:
‘In sum, the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self-defense,’ Breyer wrote.
In fact that’s exactly why they wrote it, as well as a safeguard against government tyranny (I’ve gone over this in detail using other writings from early America; see here and here.)
Furthermore:
In 2004, she [Sotomayor] joined an opinion that cited as precedent ‘the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.’
In 2009, she also joined an opinion with the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Second Amendment rights do not apply to the states.
Now thankfully Sotomayor didn’t get her way and see the Constitution gutted and the God-given rights it explicitly protects eliminated; instead, the “white male” attitude of armed self-defense came out on top. And, it’s a good thing, because two armed agents, on-duty protecting Sotomayor, are alive and safe today, and so is she, after a scary incident last week, because of these agents’ right to carry a firearm. Here’s the story, per the same Fox item:
Two armed U.S. Marshals on the protection detail for Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor shot a would-be carjacker in self-defense last week….
Kentrell Flowers, 18, was shot Friday after he approached an unmarked Marshals vehicle near Sotomayor’s home. Flowers pointed a handgun at one of the two Marshals on duty through the driver-side window in an apparent attempt to carjack him, according to a police report.
Flowers was arrested at the hospital and faces charges of armed carjacking, carrying a pistol without a license and possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
Here were some of the responses on X:
This is an “only in DC” sort of story. Justice Sotomayor’s protection detail shoot an attempted hijacker, while on duty protecting the Justice.
— pipermcq (@pipermcq) July 10, 2024
So, she benefited from a right she would deny civilian, ordinary, citizens. I wonder if she’ll ponder that?https://t.co/0slFIWpyDx
And:
Sotomayor is protected by the same guns she has repeatedly written that civilians do not need and should not own. https://t.co/KYriBW9LLA
— Parker Thayer (@ParkerThayer) July 9, 2024
And one more:
Sotomayor is protected by the same guns she has repeatedly written that civilians do not need and should not own. https://t.co/KYriBW9LLA
— Parker Thayer (@ParkerThayer) July 9, 2024
Some would argue that the Marshals are law enforcement, and they’re exactly who should be allowed to carry! But, aside from the false premise, the obvious reality is that we don’t all have an armed security detail parked outside our homes and around our blocks. The Second Amendment is a protection for normal people too, not just government officials.
But, do you think that matters to Sotomayor? Absolutely not.
Do you think this incident will “wisen” her up any to the imporance of armed self-defense for the rest of us? Again, not a chance.
Image: Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Flickr, unaltered.