A Reasonable Liberal Interpretation of Heller

Bruce Godfrey has a very well thought-out liberal take on the decision is D.C. v. Heller, in support of the Court's decision. And just as importantly, Bruce points out one of the real reasons liberals favor gun control to the extent they do:

I don't like "gun culture;" accordingly, I elect not to participate in it, just like I don't participate in tattoo culture or other subcultures. But my and other liberals' dislikes should absolutely not be the law. I think that a lot of the gun control movement involves a sort of Kulturkampf against the rural redneck, far more so than against the urban thug who can arm himself easily despite gun control laws. We do not need "guns off the streets"; we need thugs off the streets and one way to reduce thuggery is to add an aleatory risk of dying or (worse) getting shot in the groin to thug calculus. A few thugs will stop thugging; others will stop when shot; still others will revert to mere property crimes like shed breaking or stealing car stereos.

Read the whole thing. But I think Bruce makes an excellent point when he talks about the liberal disdain for rural culture, which probably reached it's apex during the Democratic Primary when Barack Obama made his asinine comments about people in small towns, guns, and religion. It seems to me that the preponderance of liberals use issues like God, community, and guns to look down their noses on people who choose not to drink the urban liberal Kool-Aid. These liberals choose to discriminate against those living in the South and living in small towns. And the rabid opposition to the right of self-defense is just one way in which that manifests itself.