July 16, 2009
Posted: July 16th, 2009 02:07 PM ET
 The National Rifle Association announced Thursday that it opposes Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court.
The National Rifle Association announced Thursday that it opposes Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - The National Rifle Association announced Thursday that it opposes Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"We believe any individual who does not agree that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right and who does not respect our God-given right of self-defense should not serve on any court, much less the highest court in the land," said a joint statement by Wayne LaPierre, the NRA executive vice president, and Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Reform.

Opposition to Sotomayor by the powerful gun lobby reflects conservative unease with President Barack Obama's first Supreme Court nominee, but is considered unlikely to prevent her confirmation by the U.S. Senate.

On Wednesday, Sotomayor strongly rejected a Republican senator's contention that she had pre-judged the issue of gun control, insisting at her Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing that wasn't true.

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, asked if she would recuse herself from future gun control cases because she ruled in the past that the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment does not apply to state gun control laws.

"I have not made up my mind. I didn't say that I didn't believe it was fundamental," Sotomayor shot back.

She explained that the word "fundamental" in legal terms refers to whether a federal statute applies to the states. Her ruling cited by Sessions referred to a prior case that made the determination, Sotomayor said, so she was following the precedent.

The NRA statement said Sotomayor relied on an improper precedent.

"Sotomayor's judicial record and testimony clearly demonstrate a hostile view of the Second Amendment and the fundamental right of self-defense guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution," the statement said. "It is only by ignoring history that any judge can say that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states."

Previously in the confirmation hearing that started Monday, Sotomayor said she recognizes an individual right to bear arms as recently identified by Supreme Court in the ruling District of Columbia v. Heller.

The recent Supreme Court 5-4 ruling concluded that a sweeping handgun ban in the nation's capital violated the constitutional right to "keep and bear arms."

Filed under: NRA • Sonia Sotomayor • Supreme Court


Constitutional-Law » illusory tenant: UW a haven for wild, empathetic liberals   July 17th, 2009 8:04 am ET

[...] CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive ...Any first-year law school student knows that Constitutional guarantees are not absolute (otherwise, if free speech were absolute there would be no grounds for court cases related to slander or libel, right?). ... [...]

“Sotomayor Hearings (VIDEO, UPDATES): Day 4″ and related posts | Results videos photos news blogs At I google wiki . com   July 16th, 2009 10:56 pm ET

[...] NRA opposes Sotomayor nomination to Supreme Court - CNN Political Ticker [...]

“Sotomayor Hearings (VIDEO, UPDATES): Day 4″ and related posts | stealthcereal   July 16th, 2009 8:22 pm ET

[...] NRA opposes Sotomayor nomination to Supreme Court - CNN Political Ticker [...]

Wake Me Up in 2011. Until Then… | DEEP BRAIN DIARY   July 16th, 2009 4:47 pm ET

[...] NRA comes out against Sonia Sotomayor.  Surprise! [...]

Jim Doyle   July 16th, 2009 3:38 pm ET

I don't see how some drug dealer in a gang in New York or Los Angeles carrying an AK47 can claim a "God given right to self-defense" These bozos need to get real. No one's going to take away your hunting riffle, bubba. We just need to get some CONTROL of the millions of weapons flooding our society. Get it?

Melissa- Ohio   July 16th, 2009 3:37 pm ET

Haha! Sorry NRA, but the majority of mainstream America doesn't care what you think! Your days of influence are numbered. =)

Sarah, Northern Colorado   July 16th, 2009 3:36 pm ET

It always makes me laugh when someone says that it's their "God given right" to carry a gun. If someone can show me the commandment in the bible that states that each person has the right, given by God, to carry a gun, I'll happily stop harping on the term "God given right".

For the millionth time, this nation was not founded by God, nor was the Constitution written by God. Yes, the nation was founded by people in search of a place they could worship freely, but it was founded by people, nonetheless, and its laws were written by a Continental Congress, which was comprised of men.

Besides, Judge Sotomayor said that she is not against hunting, and would not try to take gun rights away on a national level. These idiots just want something to whine about.

Kate in SW Fla   July 16th, 2009 3:35 pm ET

Why are these people so obsessed with guns? It makes no sense. No one is challenging their right to buy guns. It is fearmongering at its worst and about time the US stood up to these bullies.

MCD, SF, CA   July 16th, 2009 3:33 pm ET

I object to the NRA... period. They push and push for just anybody to own a gun, any kind of gun, uzis included and then refuse to take any kind of responsibility for all the deaths in this country. They SHOULD be willing to work with the government to put into place some kind of safety limits. They are TOTALLY UNWILLING to compromise in any way... it is either their way or the highway.

RAG   July 16th, 2009 3:32 pm ET

Tinfoil Hats For Everyone!

JEM   July 16th, 2009 3:31 pm ET

Let's see Mr. LaPierre...could you give me a chapter and verse on that "God given right" thing???? Or did God speak to you directly???

Cassandra Washington   July 16th, 2009 3:31 pm ET

"God-given right of self-defense"
Are they nuts? Guns, guns, and more guns ... how many people have to die like the couple in Florida before the politicians stop allowing the NRA to have their way?

NRA all the way   July 16th, 2009 3:31 pm ET

Sotomayor will next try to take the guns out of the hands of white policemen because the latino and black drug dealers, robbers, and rapists are at a disadvantage with smaller guns.

Wake up America - President Oblamo AKA President O'Blah Blah is selling this country down the river to latinos, Wall Street, and China.

Zero.   July 16th, 2009 3:30 pm ET

My ore! What does that mean. The last time I heard anything like it.

It was in a movie about German Gestapo, in praise for their superiors.
They clicked heels, just before..

Wes   July 16th, 2009 3:30 pm ET

Right, everyone should pretty much bow down to them and kiss the feet of the all mighty gun lobby–wait, pretty much everyone has.

Guns in bars? "Common sense" according to the NRA.
A person can't walk around in public with an open container of alcohol because it could lead to reckless behavior. Yet permitting a person with a drink (or two) in their hands–AND a gun in their pocket–it's not only sensible, but it's 'American!'

At this rate, the way everyone's cavning to these good ol' boys, guns in schools and airplanes (yes, airplanes) won't be far behind.

Open Your 3rd Eye   July 16th, 2009 3:30 pm ET

God-given right to own and use guns?

Wow.

I'm totally baffled, really?

Yea, I'm sure God just absolutely love guns. I mean hey, look at all the wonderful things that occur due to the use of guns such as murder. Whether it be another human being or animal.

Honestly now, that has got to be one of the most ignorant statements I've heard in all my life.

Understand this: God and guns do not mix or match in any way what-so-ever!

The same as God and money, there should never, ever be such a comparison.

Absolutely ridiculous.

skyhawkdriver   July 16th, 2009 3:29 pm ET

As a long time life member of the n.r.a. I can say that for a long time I have had no use for wayne lapierre and have many times questioned their practices..that being said,I agree that sotomayor has no buisness being on the supreme court..trying to read some of her decisions will make your head spin and your eyes water..her inability to answer questions with a straight forward answers makes you wonder where she stands on a variety of subjects

Jefferson Handcock   July 16th, 2009 3:27 pm ET

This group is still functioning ???????????

kishen c.rao   July 16th, 2009 3:26 pm ET

why???? it is a business deal???????

sean   July 16th, 2009 3:23 pm ET

The NRA is just another nutty ultra-right special interest group. They have turned the 2nd amendment from a call for a legally armed citizen militia to the right to bear rocket launchers. Their opinions are no longer valid as they have grown too extreme.

Scott   July 16th, 2009 3:22 pm ET

So what?

Oakland Tracy   July 16th, 2009 3:22 pm ET

If the NRA opposes her, then it's just another reason to see her confirmed and sitting on the Supreme Court bench.

guy   July 16th, 2009 3:21 pm ET

What a surprise!

Lauren   July 16th, 2009 3:21 pm ET

Another excuse from the right wing not to vote for her, they are so afraid someone is going to take away their guns. I truly don't think Sotomayor even cares about taking guns from anyone, that does not seem to be a priority of hers.

Denise   July 16th, 2009 3:21 pm ET

Of course they do. All they want to do is kill.

Soren   July 16th, 2009 3:19 pm ET

Of course those maniacs oppose the Judge.
Another good reason to appoint her.

Rick CT   July 16th, 2009 3:19 pm ET

If I had a vote, I might well consider invoking Obama's 5% standard n opposing her nomination. However, I'm not at all swayed by the views of the NRA bozos.

Texas   July 16th, 2009 3:18 pm ET

Who cares? They don't contribute anything legal or professional. Nobody is taking Americans right to bear arms. It is an individual right and the NRA is ridiculous. They are just trying to scare the ignorant people so they can buy more guns they can't afford.

Greg, San Francisco, CA   July 16th, 2009 3:18 pm ET

The NRA is the single worst special interest group in the history of our country. "“The Democratic National Committee is virtually 100 percent anti-firearms ownership, and the Republican National Committee stands on the side of the freedom.” – Wayne LaPierre. Big surprise that he's not supporting a Democratic nominee.

Too True For You   July 16th, 2009 3:18 pm ET

It's funny how the conservatives say they abhor judicial activism (when it's not conservative) and then repeatedly ask her to make policy statements on their pet issues.

She kept trying to clarify that as a judge she cannot make statements about rulings out of the context of a specific case, which includes the facts of the case, the arguments before the court, applicable precedent, and the laws of the specific state venue. But the republicans kept hammering away trying to get her to perform the activist role they so decry.

Jon   July 16th, 2009 3:18 pm ET

The NRA has lawyers. They should know better and it indicates their knowledge that their members are idiots. She cannot comment on how she would rule or what she believes. That would be the basis for a "fundamentalist" judge. Her job would be, as is the job of all judges, to interpret the law and facts presented before her. The NRA is just pandering to their uninformed followers. Further, the senators asking these questions are also pandering. Most of them are lawyers and know very well that commenting on a legal scenario and your personal belief for the outcome of that scenario would warrant the candidate unqualified to serve as judge. Attention NRA and NRA members, learn about a topic before you comment – it makes for a better conversation.

E Coli Tainted Palin Word Salad Hazardous To Your Health   July 16th, 2009 3:16 pm ET

Really? I'm shocked! Just shocked beyond words! Next thing you know the right to lifers will oppose her, too! Then, all the old, bald southern white rednecks will line up and oppose her! Imagine that, will ya?! What is this world coming to, I ask you?! Please, someone explain this right-wing nutjob paranoid lunacy. You mean there are people who actually believe that the Fauxytale News Channel courtesy of News Crap Inc. is a legitimate source for factual news?

Brad   July 16th, 2009 3:16 pm ET

It is for the Supreme Court to declare that any rights under the Bill of Rights apply to the states under the 14th amendment due process clause. Other federal appellate courts have ruled the same way.

If a nominee is not "packing" at the confirmation hearing you know the NRA is going to oppose the nomination.

ANGIE IN PA   July 16th, 2009 3:15 pm ET

The NRA Are Pathetic!

single mom   July 16th, 2009 3:15 pm ET

I can't wait to read the comments on this!
The 2nd Amendment is part of the US Constitution. When she becomes a Supreme Court Justice (as she hasn't had 'foot-in-mouth-itis') she will be sworn to uphold the ENTIRE Constitution.
No, a hunter doesn't need an AK 47 to hunt deer, buffalo or moose, but the right to bear arms and protect hearth and home is one of the reasons this country has survived this long.
It's as important as, say the 14-16th amendments and I'm sure she would support those.

Andy   July 16th, 2009 3:14 pm ET

As law-abiding Americans, we should denounce and dismiss any NRA stance on guns, especially since we know that the easy accessibliity of firearms in this country has killed more more than saved. The only ones who should have guns arre officers who are trained and authorized to use them.

Mike   July 16th, 2009 3:14 pm ET

The NRA is this countries biggest union and that's not a compliment. They use bullying tactics to get their way. They wave the second amendment. Anytime someone speaks out against what they believe, they try to silence them which violates the first amendment. Absolutely no gun control is thier mantra and they'll vehemntly oppose anyone who even suggests any type of control. They say guns don't kill, people do. Well, if that's true then what was an uzi designed to do? Hunt quail?

yuri   July 16th, 2009 3:13 pm ET

The other name for NRA is GOP. They practically do not want to know anything else except guns and other firearms. They will vehemently deny it and get too defensive.

Geoff   July 16th, 2009 3:11 pm ET

Is it a second Amendment right or a God-given right? They are legally separated as far as I remember.

Wasn't the second Amendment written before the country had an organized military and farmers might need to band together to keep the King of England out of their faces?

Steve   July 16th, 2009 3:10 pm ET

Shocking....America! A country and people heading straight toward it own self destruction simply to keep the right to have the right to kill his fellow man anytime he gets pissed on the highway because he had a bad day at the office of get the middle finger.

Oh well! We will overcome one day!

Kelby In Houston, TX   July 16th, 2009 3:09 pm ET

Dear NRA gun nuts,
I swear to God, nobody is going to take away yer gun. We on the left are certain that we couldn't even if we tried. And as far as our list of things to do...taking away yer gun ain't on it! I may be a liberal, but I am also a Texan and I like to shoot and hunt...I have guns...but come on, can't we apply some common sense to the argument?
AND as far as the confirmation of Sotomayor...your opposition is even more irrelevent than GOP opposition...just calm down

BLS   July 16th, 2009 3:08 pm ET

Big surprise. I'm not a huge gun control person, but I've learned to ignore basically anything coming from the NRA. If they had their way, everyone would be able to go to the corner grocery for some milk and an uzi.

will nyc   July 16th, 2009 3:08 pm ET

NRA has become more fringe and extreme in its stance than ever...

harvey   July 16th, 2009 3:08 pm ET

defending yourself is not a God-given right, there's no such thing. your rights are guaranteed by the Constitution. why don't you explain why you have a right to possess an assault weapon, because it's Your choice, but a woman can't have an abortion, because it's HER choice? because you can't. Why don't you all move to Alaska, secede from the Union, install the Palins as King and Queen, and keep your oil and your guns to yourselves. then you can Drill, Baby, Drill and Kill, Baby, Kill until eternity.

Ken   July 16th, 2009 3:07 pm ET

Good grief. As a gun owner, I despise the imbecilic rightwing rhetoric from the goon LaPierre. If NRA's Amerika is against it, it certainly must be good for America.

David Newport, OR   July 16th, 2009 3:05 pm ET

too bad...it is a done deal. Isn't democracy grand?

Sammy   July 16th, 2009 3:05 pm ET

Well the 2nd amendment doesnt deal with self-protection, but whether or not people have the right to have guns to do it with. Also whether or not states have the power to decide. The constitution says no. Based on its wording the only question is whether or not congress can regulate it. Since that word is included the answer is yes. And pretty much every time congress makes good law doing so its upheld.

So really, if people want strong regulations for handguns get congress to do it. Once such a law is passed, if carefully written, it will hold. It will also get my support.

Steve in Kentucky   July 16th, 2009 3:04 pm ET

Truth means nothing to the NRA.

Janelle in VA   July 16th, 2009 3:04 pm ET

What else is new...

tjaman   July 16th, 2009 3:04 pm ET

Isn't the NRA raising this objection a little late in the game? I mean really, she _was_ nominated quite awhile ago ...

drman   July 16th, 2009 3:01 pm ET

So what will the NRA zealots do if she's confirmed? Will they hunt her down and shoot her because they disagree with her?
Wayne LaPierre is about as good a fear monger as Palin the quitter is, maybe they could join forces and rally the radical right wing-NUTS.

Truth Teller   July 16th, 2009 3:01 pm ET

Hey NRA, too bad, she's coming in. So blow it out your....you know the rest.

Que Viva Puert Rico Libre!!!

CF   July 16th, 2009 3:00 pm ET

As a sportshooter and a person who wants to protect my family, I fully support the right to bear arms when necessary.

However, your right to bear arms does not trump my right (or anybody else's) to not be shot.

The NRA doesn't get that. Rather than restrict dangerous weapons in areas where they are a problem, or step up the requirements and background checks for getting a gun, they would rather allow anyone and everyone applicable to get their hands on these weapons, and only punish them after they've misused them.

How many more innocent people need to be shot before they realize that an ounce of prevention beforehand is worth more than a ton of punishment afterward?

Julie in AZ   July 16th, 2009 2:59 pm ET

I'm pretty sure that the Second Amendment is not actually defined as a "God-given right of self-defense!"
That is the most ridiculous statement. Obviously, look who's making it. Yes-more guns. Less law. That's exactly what this country needs. What an ignorant idiot

Ken in Gainesville   July 16th, 2009 2:57 pm ET

And to hell with the NRA!

skeeve   July 16th, 2009 2:57 pm ET

Who cares what NRA has to say. If they want to cling to their guns let them cling to their gun. There is a good negative correlation between IQ/education and a number of gun in a household. Why should anybody care about an ignorant opinion.

Debi   July 16th, 2009 2:57 pm ET

Am I the only person in this country completely tired of the "agree with us or else" attitude of the anti-abortion activist and the NRA members?

As Sotomayor said, it is settled law.

The Lonely Libertarian of Liverpool NY   July 16th, 2009 2:56 pm ET

thank-you the great folks of the NRA now that something I can agree with.

Randy in AZ   July 16th, 2009 2:55 pm ET

So how is the NO Rifle Association any different from the rest of the Grand NO Party? "No, No, No." That's all they can say, regardless of the lack of any logic to their statements.

rice, bryan   July 16th, 2009 2:55 pm ET

and this surprises anyone. they think 1 person can change the constitution. they will pray to the white gods to not let this woman through. these are the same people that think that a president can alone pass a ammunition tax. they scare their followers into this crap, and without any research the dumbas@ fall for it hook line and sinker.

Jim   July 16th, 2009 2:55 pm ET

Stick a sock in it.

fortydam   July 16th, 2009 2:53 pm ET

The NRA continues to use this format to sell their products at all time prices.

geecee   July 16th, 2009 2:52 pm ET

No kidding? I am shocked. So what else is new? They would oppose anything Obama does and everyone Obama nominates. The NRA is full of Rethuglicans, among other stuff they are "full" of. Too bad they can wield so much power in Washington, D.C. They must have a ton of Obstructionist Party members in their pockets, or should I say, a ton of Obstructionist Party members have NRA money in their pockets! In any case, keep up the bad work NRA. You are doing this country a great disservice. We are sick of hearing about the nearly daily shootings of innocent people across ths country because you refuse to allow gun control in any form. So, sure, let the psychos and criminals have them. What have we got to lose? Certainly not our guns, just our lives, right?

Royster   July 16th, 2009 2:49 pm ET

It is so wrong in my opinion how the NRA extrapolates four words in the Constitution ('keep and bear arms') into wanting assualt weapons to remain legal, wanting concealed weapons to be carried into National Parks and now bars in Arizona, and basically equating 'self-defense' into the easy and convenient ability to shoot and kill anyone, anytime, anywhere....just because the NRA member happened to 'feel threatened' at the moment.

How large of a 'killing by gun tragedy' in this country (ala Columbine) will it take before the NRA realizes just how wrong its position is?
Lest we forget, when this country began, slavery was also a 'norm'....are we bound by some tradition to keep ALL these obsolete practices alive because they existed when our country was founded?

That said, all guns are not bad...but the NRA fighting against banning assualt weapons and concealed weapons is basically ludricrous and will never get any votes from ME or anyone else I know. And you can bluster all you want about taking your gun from 'your cold dead hands'...in the end someone WILL be doing that. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

A. Goodwin   July 16th, 2009 2:49 pm ET

*Hostile* view? Nothing could be more hostile than the NRA's views. Not to mention, they have misrepresented her words. Ask the kids/family's at Columbine what they think of the NRA...

Luke Brown   July 16th, 2009 2:49 pm ET

LaPierre is a world class crackpot. He is a tool of the right-wing Republican party.

J Farrow   July 16th, 2009 2:48 pm ET

The NRA leadership has been and is now the biggest bunch of fanatics in the country. I was in a bookstore where Wayne LaPierre was signing his book and he had more bodyguards around him than the President. They have nothing to worry about. Even if Obama were to appointment all nine justices the second amendment will not be repealed.

JD from Moraga, CA   July 16th, 2009 2:47 pm ET

Yes please – let's derail the nomination because a bunch of rednecks need fully automatic weapons to kill squirrels.

Any first-year law school student knows that Constitutional guarantees are not absolute (otherwise, if free speech were absolute there would be no grounds for court cases related to slander or libel, right?).

The gun lobby needs to find something constructive to do with its time.

I Support the Right to Carry Nukes, I'm the NRA   July 16th, 2009 2:47 pm ET

Nazi
Republican
Army

Nukes
Rockets
A-bombs

Support the Right to ARM BEARS

Pete   July 16th, 2009 2:47 pm ET

So in summary, to conservatives health care is a frivolous perk, a gun is directly from God himself. Yet they are surprised that they lose election after election.

GI Joe   July 16th, 2009 2:47 pm ET

Hmmmm – seems to be turning into the Good Ole White Boy's Gun Club.

Guess it might be time to cancel my membership and save a few bucks.

Willy   July 16th, 2009 2:47 pm ET

This is a good technique to sell more guns! I love it!

Mike K   July 16th, 2009 2:47 pm ET

Let's just say that anyone the NRA opposes I am strongly in favor of.

CF   July 16th, 2009 2:46 pm ET

The NRA isn't happy unless everybody constantly has a gun aimed at everybody else.... this is what they consider a "safe America."

phyllis   July 16th, 2009 2:46 pm ET

All I have to say on this is GO SONIA SOTOMAYOR GO. You have my support. thank you.

changing my screen name to see if it helps getting my comments posted   July 16th, 2009 2:46 pm ET

It is not our god given right, it is our Constitutional given right. God is supposed to be staying out of our politics.

eric   July 16th, 2009 2:45 pm ET

Now there's a shocker... Really. A GOP run organization opposing something... GO AWAY NRA and GOP..... There SHOULD be a ban on asult weapons... it should be tougher now a days to obtain a gun. You should have the right to own one,but you have to PROVE your right!!!!

VOTE NO TO GOP in 2010 GET GROUPS LIKE THIS AND THE GOP OUT OF AMERICAN SOCIETY!!!!!!!! RACISTS!!!!

Julia Byrd- Hayden Idaho   July 16th, 2009 2:45 pm ET

Good, I would worry about our country if this bunch of gun-toten; lunatics supported her

Chris - Albany, NY   July 16th, 2009 2:45 pm ET

Geez...just for that IM all for her!!!

Lee   July 16th, 2009 2:45 pm ET

I'm tired of people twisting the Constitution's meaning. When the founding fathers wrote that, as the states must maintain a militia, the right of the people to bear arms must not be abridged, the obviously meant that any American had the right to own and carry a muzzle-loading, ball-and-powder flintlock rifle or pistol. I think they also assumed that Americans could carry a sword.

"Arms" to the founding fathers meant those weapons a man could carry and which existed at the time. It did not include rocket launchers, assault rifles, grenades, automatic pistols, revolvers, poison gas, nuclear weapons, tear gas, flame throwers, dive bombers, or fighter jets.

Let's get back to Constitutional basics. I have a right to carry a musket anywhere I want to: Walmart, my kid's school, my job, a theme park, whatever. The Constitution says what it says and it means what the authors meant. Case closed.

Nathan,   July 16th, 2009 2:44 pm ET

The NRA would oppose anyone who didn't believe that we had the right to have bazookas sticking out our front windows at our neighbors in the event they play their music loud. These guys are just as radical as PETA and more dangerous. Some of us right thinking people see "self defense" as being able to walk down the streets without having people, law abiding or not, carry concealed weapons under there coat. Even law abiding citizens react differently to situations when they have a gun. Why not let a marginal confrontational not escalate into something more if you know that your packing a gun.

The NRa is right about one thing: Its not guns who kill people. Its the NRA and its radical stance on guns that do.

Michigan   July 16th, 2009 2:44 pm ET

...the nra needs to get over themselves....

Necie in OKC   July 16th, 2009 2:43 pm ET

SO! Leave the woman alone already! She is obviously more qualilfied than these gun toting, bible thumpin hypocrites.

Larry   July 16th, 2009 2:42 pm ET

The only way we can lose the right to bear arms is to amend the Contitution and take that right away.

letsgetreal   July 16th, 2009 2:41 pm ET

The NRA is not a valid organization as long as they endorse private ownership of fully automatic weapons.
I own over 20 rifles, handguns and shotguns and find NO NEED for such a weapon exists.
Throw this ridiculous notion out NRA and you may be seen as legitimate.

Al-NY,NY   July 16th, 2009 2:40 pm ET

Gee...what a surprise. Someone that does NOT say "Hey everyone. YOu want a gun. You have a record? No problem" doesn't like the nominee. TFB there NRA... She is in

In her first policies response, Sarah palin flip-floped her position on "cap and trade" during the campaign and now.   July 16th, 2009 2:39 pm ET

Should we be surprised?

JR   July 16th, 2009 2:38 pm ET

Wow, it I wasn't for her before, this puts the icing on the cake. If the NRA is against, then I'm for.

Joseph, Los Angeles   July 16th, 2009 2:37 pm ET

Oh my... The NRA opposes Sotomayer... I don't know if my heart can take this.

Tony in Maine   July 16th, 2009 2:37 pm ET

Should NASA decide to send someone back to the moon, I nominate Wayne LaPierre, executive director and fearmonger in chief of the NRA, but only if they'll make it a one way trip.

Carmen, Miami FL   July 16th, 2009 2:35 pm ET

The NRA is lying. Where is the clearly laid out hostility to the second amendment? Why didn't they mention exactly how she is hostile to the second amendment? They really will say anything, no matter how baseless it is. What a bunch of idiots.

Haven't they realized the majority of Americans don't find her to be a lightning rod of controversy anymore, that Americans have moved on?

KizzyMae   July 16th, 2009 2:35 pm ET

How is this a "God given" right?

Angus McDugan   July 16th, 2009 2:35 pm ET

Get ready for hateful name calling by the libs over this. Standard lib MO.

Roger   July 16th, 2009 2:35 pm ET

What else is new?

Dave C - NJ   July 16th, 2009 2:32 pm ET

The NRA is pathetic.

The 2nd Amendment has been twisted and abused. The founding fathers would roll in their graves if they read just a day's worth of present-day news regarding the daily use of legally purchased guns.

Don't worry crybabies, no one is going to take your precious guns away.

The Unshrub   July 16th, 2009 2:31 pm ET

As an owner of several guns I can make a decision as if I should support Sotomayor's nomination. I can now say that I strongly SUPPORT her nomination. The NRA has become an extreme organization that doesn't know the work compromise.

Peejay   July 16th, 2009 2:31 pm ET

These are the same guys who lobbied to allow guns in Section 8 housing, national parks, and college classrooms. I consider their opposition a badge of honor for our soon-to-be-newest Supreme Court Justice!

Moderate Democrat   July 16th, 2009 2:30 pm ET

First: The right to bear arms is something that should not (and will not) be taken away).

Second: So is the right to privacy. You can NOT cherry pick your rights, for ANY reason. "Suspected but not confirmed to be a terrorist" is the same as "suspected but not confirmed to be a future murderer using a gun". So to you republicans who support giving up rights for the cowardly excuses of national security. You disgust the brave men and women such as myself who have served this country in the pursuit of guaranteeing ALL of our rights are enforced, not just the select few that choose to radically cling to while throwing out the rest of them.

Lastly: Sotomayer, MAY have personal views, as do ALL individuals. But her record is VERY consistant. She has always based her decisions on LAW, and not BIAS.

Conslusion: Stop whining, get on with business. Vote yes or no, but stop wasting our time!

Shelby   July 16th, 2009 2:30 pm ET

No one gives a fat rat what you think....

Reuben   July 16th, 2009 2:30 pm ET

Your kidding. She can't answer a question with a direct answer and you think they would be against her. Maybe Obama can find soneone qualified next time. NRA lifetime membership and a large gun safe is the best money you will ever spend other than on your wife of course.

Independant from NY   July 16th, 2009 2:30 pm ET

The NRA is the PETA of the conservative right. They take a good idea, take it way too far and make it a laughingstock of the socio-political world.

B Lewis in Austin   July 16th, 2009 2:30 pm ET

When you look up "paranoia" in the dictionary, it refers you to NRA. Their constant use of fear tactics gets old after a while.

JW   July 16th, 2009 2:28 pm ET

Gotta be a good pick if the NRA disagrees with it.

Amy from MN   July 16th, 2009 2:27 pm ET

This is a surprise?!

katiec   July 16th, 2009 2:26 pm ET

Well, that would be a good reason to support her.
Any radical group that supports bullets that will pierce anything ,does not give second thought to putting our police etc in danger, supports selling of lethal weapons to anyone is not someone who I would give much creditibility to.
People should and will be allowed to hunt, own guns etc, it is their extremes that really disturb me.

Steph   July 16th, 2009 2:25 pm ET

Wow, that's a shocker! The headline should read, "Crazy, gun-toting hicks don't like Latina judge because she doesn't have a rifle rack in the back of her truck."

Ed, Santa Fe, NM   July 16th, 2009 2:24 pm ET

Oh what a surprise! Does the NRA have like a SPECIAL INTEREST or something?

NRA is a sad joke.

Enlightened Voter   July 16th, 2009 2:23 pm ET

A republican will fight for your right to own a gun but not to have health care.

Candy West Virginia   July 16th, 2009 2:22 pm ET

The right to carry a gun is not GOD given you morons. And give me one good reason a person needs an AK 47??

Comments have been closed for this article

subscribe RSS Icon
About The Ticker

The latest political news from CNN's Best Political Team, with campaign coverage, 24-7. Sign up for our twice daily Ticker emails. Got a news tip or feedback? For complete political coverage, bookmark CNNPolitics.com.

CNN=Politics Screensaver

CNN=Politics ScreensaverTap into the power of The Situation Room. Download this powerful new tool that keeps you posted on the latest political news from the campaign trail.
Download (4.1 MB, PC only)

twitter
Categories
Powered by WordPress.com VIP