Liberty Park Press

Liberty Park Press

  • Headlines
  • Politics
  • dating website soul
  • dream moods dating
  • when do phoebe and joey start dating
  • Money
  • Sports

National CCW Debated on Fox, One Journalist Doesn’t Like It

January 9, 2017 By Dave Workman

Ellen Ratner (Screen capture - YouTube/the Real News.com)
Ellen Ratner (Screen capture – YouTube/the Real News.com)

During a discussion on Fox News’ “Strategy Room” last week, Fox News contributor Ellen Ratner – a veteran journalist who relies on the First Amendment – candidly acknowledged, “I am one of these people who is not supportive of gun rights.”

This came during a 3 ½-minute debate over national concealed carry reciprocity legislation. Joining anchor Patti Ann Browne and Matt Keelen, founder of the Keelen Group, Ratner continued that, in her opinion, the Second Amendment is about maintaining a “well-regulated militia.”

“I think that it does not give everybody a right to have a gun,” Ratner said.

Second Amendment activists might concur with Ratner so far as the contention that the amendment doesn’t “give” anybody anything. The prevailing wisdom in the firearms community is that the amendment protects and affirms an individual right, but does not create it. Still, Ratner’s comment suggests that gun rights advocates have much more to do in terms of outreach and education.

Ratner went on, observing, “There have been a couple of Supreme Court cases, one in the 30s, which actually promoted the fact that you can’t just have a gun, and then it got overturned recently in two other cases so, you know, it depends on who is on the Supreme Court for sure on this issue.”

Is Ratner’s recollection of the infamous 1939 ruling in U.S. v. Miller accurate? Not according to the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who authored the historic 2008 majority decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. Here’s what he said, on pages 49 and 50 of that landmark ruling:

“JUSTICE STEVENS places overwhelming reliance upon this Court’s decision in United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 (1939). “[H]undreds of judges,” we are told, “have relied on the view of the amendment we endorsed there,” post, at 2, and “[e]ven if the textual and historical arguments on both sides of the issue were evenly balanced, respect for the well-settled views of all of our predecessors on this Court, and for the rule of law itself . . . would prevent most jurists from endorsing such a dramatic upheaval in the law,” post, at 4. And what is, according to JUSTICE STEVENS, the holding of Miller that demands such obeisance? That the Second Amendment “protects the right to keep and bear arms for certain military purposes, but that it does not curtail the legislature’s power to regulate the nonmilitary use and ownership of weapons.”

“Nothing so clearly demonstrates the weakness of JUSTICE STEVENS’ case. Miller did not hold that and cannot possibly be read to have held that. The judgment in the case upheld against a Second Amendment challenge two men’s federal indictment for transporting an unregistered short-barreled shotgun in interstate commerce, in violation of the National Firearms Act, 48 Stat. 1236. It is entirely clear that the Court’s basis for saying that the Second Amendment did not apply was not that the defendants were “bear[ing] arms” not “for . . . military purposes” but for “nonmilitary use,” post, at 2. Rather, it was that the type of weapon at issue was not eligible for Second Amendment protection: “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that the possession or use of a [shortbarreled shotgun] at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.” 307 U. S., at 178 (emphasis added). “Certainly,” the Court continued, “it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.” Ibid. Beyond that, the opinion provided no explanation of the content of the right.”

A moment later in the Fox discussion, Ratner contended that the proposed reciprocity law “is insane because, again, it allows concealed permits to exist and I don’t think they should exist.

“But that’s just, you know, crazy old me,” she added with a smile.

Ratner is, according to an on-line biography, a news analyst on Fox and a White House correspondent and bureau chief for the Talk Media News Service. A veteran journalist, she has appeared on Fox frequently. She is also an accomplished author.

Related:

Concealed Carry Surge Continues as New Congress Takes Over

TRUMP’S PROMISE: His First Day Offensive Against Gun Control

On His Way Out, Obama Clings to Gun Control

Facebook Comments

Filed Under: 2nd Amendment, News Feed Tagged With: Ellen Ratner, Fox News, Reciprocity, Right-to-Carry, Second Amendment

About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is an award-winning career journalist with an expertise in firearms and the outdoors. He is the author of several books dealing with firearms politics. He has a degree in editorial journalism from the University of Washington and is a lifelong Washington resident.

Please Subscribe

We respect your email privacy

Powered by AWeber Email Marketing

 

Featured Stories

Fallout From Ongoing The Post Apocalyptic Dating Scene

Big Disappointment: Politicians and Press Get Low Poll Ratings

$50K Reward Offered For Perp Info in Memphis Shooting

Smoked Hogg? DNC Votes to Void Election of Vice Chair

NY Budget Includes Funding for ‘Office of Gun Violence Prevention’

VPC Releases Report Alleging Suppressors Are ‘Threat to Public Safety’

26 AGs Sign Amicus Urging SCOTUS to Take Hawaii CCW Case

ATF Issuing Suppressors for the ‘Health and Safety’ of its Agents, but What About Us?

VIRAL STORIES

Don’t Look Now, But The Clock Is Ticking

Domino Bot Wows Internet

The Soviet Ghost Town Of The Arctic Expanse

These Insects Redefine “The Groove”

Colossal Pizza Slice Marks The End Of An Era

The Hardheaded And Plummeting Ratings Of Sports Television

Escaping The Madness- Where On Earth Does One Go To Avoid Bubonic Politicization?

Driving A Jet Engine Or Racing A Car? Choose Wisely

About Us

Liberty Park Press is an online information website dedicated to providing you with breaking, useful, or interesting information.

Read More

PRIVACY AND TERMS

Welcome to Libertyparkpress.com. If you continue to browse and use this website you are agreeing to comply with and be bound by the following terms and conditions of use:
Continue Reading…

CONTACT US

Liberty Park Press
12500 NE 10th Place
Bellevue, WA 98005

Copyright © 2025 · Liberty Park Press Inc · all rights reserved · Log in