Libertarian Party lauds Supreme Court gun ruling

The following is a media release from the Libertarian Party:

For Immediate Release
June 26, 2008

Contact: Andrew Davis
E-mail: [email protected]
Office: 202-333-0008 ext. 225
Mobile: 202-731-0002

Libertarian Party says Heller ruling a ‘preservation of liberty in the United States’

Party says firearms are distinct component of the national character

Washington, D.C. - Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in the case District of Columbia v. Heller, Libertarian Party spokesperson Andrew Davis called the case a “landmark victory for the preservation of liberty in the United States.”

The Libertarian Party was the only political party to file a brief in the case.

“Firearms are a distinct component of the American national character,” says Davis. “The Libertarian Party is more than pleased to see that the Supreme Court recognizes this American tradition as an individual right, and seeks to protect it as such. Today’s decision is a giant step forward in protecting the rights of millions of American gun owners.”

The Libertarian Party’s amicus brief, written by Libertarian Party presidential nominee Bob Barr, can be found here.

In the brief, Barr, who also serves on the board for the National Rifle Association, stated the Libertarian Party “is an established political party dedicated to a strict adherence to the Constitution,” which includes “the right of an individual to keep and bear arms in the defense of life, liberty and property.”

The Heller decision is expected to be a major component of presidential politics in the upcoming election, and is an issue with which both presumptive GOP nominee John McCain and Democratic nominee Barack Obama have struggled.

“Given that the NRA once called McCain one of the ‘premier flag carriers for the enemies of the Second Amendment,’ it is clear which political party truly cares about the Second Amendment,” says Davis. “The Bush administration has consistently tried to undermine the individual’s right to keep and bear arms, and the GOP seems poised again to nominate a candidate for president with a horrible track record on gun rights.”

Davis remarked that “Obama isn’t any better than McCain” when it comes to the Second Amendment.

The Libertarian Party is America’s third largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party by visiting The Libertarian Party proudly stands for smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

For more information on this issue, or to arrange a media interview, please call Andrew Davis at (202) 731-0002.
Paid for by the Libertarian National Committee—2600 Virginia Ave, N.W. Suite 200, Washington D.C. 20037
Content not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee

3 Responses to “Libertarian Party lauds Supreme Court gun ruling”

  1. Timothy West Says:

    I’m waiting for disinter to note now unlibertarian Barr is on guns.

    Barr, who also serves on the board for the National Rifle Association, stated the Libertarian Party “is an established political party dedicated to a strict adherence to the Constitution,

    only roughly a bit more than half the party is. the others desire no government at all and undermine the political actions of it any way they can. They proudly don’t support any part of the Constitution of the Bill of Rights. Ask em. they’ll tell you they didn’t sign it.

  2. Michael Seebeck Says:

    Well, this shows that they didn’t read section 2 of the holdings where the Scalidiot did a Kelo on “shall not be infringed” by listing where it COULD be infringed.

    Most people got hung up on Section 1.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    Yet another example of the government conspiring to strip individuals of their natural right to self-defense. In upholding the inexcusable burdens of licensing, the government maintains the bloated bureaucracy of its background checking system and continues to deny criminals, children, and the mentally ill their lawful rights. With the dangers in modern society, how can politicians deny a means of defense to the very people most likely to need a gun to defend themselves, children and ex-felons faced with reprisals from old grudges or family members of their victims who are out for revenge?

Leave a Reply