Complete article hereGun rights next for Supreme Court
6/16/2008WASHINGTON - One momentous case down, another equally historic decision to go.
The Supreme Court returns to the bench Monday with 17 cases still unresolved, including its first-ever comprehensive look at the Second Amendment's right to bear arms.
The guns case - including Washington, D.C.'s ban on handguns - is widely expected to be a victory for supporters of gun rights. Top officials of a national gun control organization said this week that they expect the handgun ban to be struck down, but they are hopeful other gun regulations will survive.
---------------------------------------
The dispute over gun rights poses several important questions. Although the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791, the court has never definitively said what it means to have a right to keep and bear arms. The justices also could indicate whether, even with a strong statement in support of gun rights, Washington's handgun ban and other gun control laws can be upheld.
Officials at the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said recently that they expect Washington's 32-year-old handgun ban to fall but believe that background checks, limits on large-volume gun sales and prohibitions on certain categories of weapons can survive.
Keep your fingers crossed and pray for the Man In Black (I'm quoting Mark Levin) to have the wisdom to simply respect and interpret the Second Amendment as it was originally intended and written by Founding Fathers.
There is so much at stake here...without the Second Amendment ruled as an individual right of the American people, the rest of the individual Civil Liberties we all enjoy in this country could wither and perish some day in the not so far future. Because without the guns that help Americans protect themselves against crime and against a government turning against its own citizens, the freedom of speech or the freedom to peacefully assemble don't really worth anything.
You see, dictators are not particularly scared by disarmed people asking for freedom from tyrany, liberty and human rights. They just summarly execute them.
2 comments:
Trouble is that unless the SCOTUS is very careful, they'll leave all sorts of loopholes on things like "assault" weapons, magazine capacities, etc.
Paul Helmke has publicly stated that he expects DC to lose - and he has stated that it will serve as a rallying cry for anti-gunners. They will immediately start pushing the bans I mentioned above, as well as purchasing restrictions, bullet serialization, etc.
So far, a 5-4 vote is easily predictable (the 4 "liberal" judges, vs. the 4 "conservative' judges, Kennedy as a swing vote - and he is leaning heavily toward Heller). That means that even the majority opinion will likely support a individual-rights view, but will leave some room for the dissenting position, which (in general) is that even if it is an individual right, that the "un-infringable right" must leave room for "reasonable" laws and restrictions.
My best hope is that the Supreme Court's majority opinion supports the idea that bore the 2A: that the people should be armed well enough so that the people could serve as a militia (ie. Switzerland - in fact, allusions to Switzerland's military style were not sparse in the documents written by the founding fathers).
In other words: the people should be armed as the standing military, with the same weapons technology being available to civilians, as well as the military treating itself with the same restrictions that are legislated upon the people. (Notwithstanding that the anti-federalists spoke out against a standing military as it was seen as an affront to freedom.)
Not sure why I pressed submit on that, wasn't done :)
Anyway: I also suspect that Obama will appoint a judge that will want any pro-individual-right stance overturned.
I want to see the NRA work harder after this ruling. I know I will: I'll be working harder to get volunteers, I'll be working harder at what the NRA tells me to do, and I'll be encouraging my volunteers to do the same. This ruling won't give us a free pass, remember, our opponents don't respect the court and they don't respect the constitution (except when it is convenient).
Post a Comment