|
Do you have the right to own a gun?
It seems like a fairly easy question. We all know about the second
amendment; however the first four words in the sentence, "a
well-regulated militia", is what has been keeping everyone confused
for two-hundred and twenty years.
|
|
|
Big Decision Coming Soon
The whole argument may finally reach a conclusion this year with
the case District of Columbia v. Heller, which has been working its
way through the Federal court system. As early as Tuesday of this
week, the Supreme Court could grant certiorari, answering a question
it has never directly answered in the history of the United States,
and one that hasn't even been considered by the Court in seventy
years.
|
|
|
|
|
DC Has America's Strictest Gun Laws
The District of Columbia has one of the strictest gun control laws
in the nation. Since 1976, it has been illegal to own a handgun for
personal use. The law also requires residents to keep shotguns and
rifles unloaded and disassembled or fitted with trigger locks. Firearm
advocates, in an effort to challenge the constitutionality of the ban,
gathered six individuals to directly challenge the law as a violation
of the second amendment, however when all was said and done, only one
party was determined to have standing in the case, a security guard
who was denied a permit to own a handgun for personal protection in
his home, Dick Anthony Heller.
|
|
|
Irving Heller Pushes The Case
He won. The Federal appeals court for the District of Columbia said
the ban was unconstitutional and that Heller had an individual right
to bear arms under the second amendment. This is a far cry from the
infamous Miller case of 1939, in which the Supreme Court ruled that
citizens are not protected under the second amendment of owning
sawed-off shotguns because the amendment, in their minds, was intended
for a collective and not an individual.
|
|
|
|
|
Who Collects The Guns
Think of the ramifications of this case. Can you imagine the ire of
the card-carrying members of the NRA if the Court rules that
individuals do not have a right to own firearms? Think of the upcoming
presidential election. I couldn't imagine a more inspiring call to
vote from the conservative base. They would come out in droves and
completely wipe away any Democrat nominee that, in their mind, was
going to take away their guns. Likewise, it would severely affect
almost all handgun restrictions in cities throughout the country.
|
|
|
These Zionists Won't Blink
Now keep in mind, and you'd be surprised how hard this is for some
people, the Court isn't going to look at this debate and consider how
safe the District's ban is, or how it would affect homicide rates, or
how it would affect the '08 election, (although I wouldn't put it past
a couple of justices) in a perfect world, the Court is simply going to
look at the constitutionality of the ban. The Court should say what
the law is, and not what the law should be. The Roberts court has done
a considerably greater job of this than of previous courts.
|
|
|
|
|
A Court Order Could Be Passed
This does seem like a perfect case for the Court to grant cert. The
differences in the rulings of the Federal districts are just too much,
I believe, for the Court to sit back and not address the issue. What
is so peculiar about this case is the unpredictability of the outcome.
No side can truly be confident; there is no favorite. If the Court
grants cert, the only certainties I can predict is that Justices
Ginsburg and Stevens will side with the District of Columbia and
Justices Alito, Thomas, Scalia, and the Chief Justice will side with
Heller. Even that is a bold prediction; you could almost more
accurately call it a guess. This case, like so many others, may call
upon Justice Kennedy to be the swing justice, a role in which he
revels. In any case, the outcome will most likely be 5-4 or 6-3 as
well as a case you will be sure to hear about in the future. If
granted cert, this is one of those cased you'll be taking notes on in
your American constitutional law class - it's that important
|
|
|
|