In response to my post on Senator Ted Cruz’s confrontation with Senator Dianne Feinstein, I heard from an adviser to Senator Cruz, who believes I provided an inaccurate and incomplete account of Senator Cruz’s views.
What Senator Cruz believes, I was told, is that (a) the weapons Senator Feinstein wants to ban fall under the category of “common use of the time,” which would make her ban unconstitutional; (b) that the itemized list Feinstein proposes raises serious constitutional issues; and (c) the Texas senator is fully aware of the meaning and implications of the Heller decision. I’m happy to relay those clarifications, as well as a link to an appearance on Fox News by Senator Cruz.
People can read my original post, watch the link I provided to the Cruz v. Feinstein confrontation, and then watch Senator Cruz’s post-hearing interview and decide for themselves how clear and effective his line of questioning was and the merits of my critique. I simply wanted to convey the views of Senator Cruz, to be sure readers were aware of them.
Thank you, but you should have been more thoughtful from the get go. Cruz is not saying 2nd Amendment rights are absolute. No one says that we can build hydrogen bombs in the basement–you are aware of that, right? Cruz is pointing out that it is hypocritical and inconsistent to chip away at the 2nd Amendment without making the 1st Amendment (and others) vulnerable to the same attack. Is that so hard to understand?
Incidentally, it appears today that Senate Democrats are going to omit the assault weapons ban from their gun control bill—no doubt because they realize that it's politically toxic. I'm surprised that so wise and seasoned a Senate veteran as Senator Feinstein overlooked that elementary fact of American politics…