This is a tremendous breakthrough for freedom in America.
The ruling does not, however, strike down all gun laws or restriction on where guns might be carried such as schools or laws that prevent felons or
the mentally ill from carrying guns.
Most notably the ruling strikes down the D.C. gun ban and laws that require that guns be carried or stored in an unusable state and foremost, the
ruling affirms the individual right to keep and bear arms.
It is amazing to me that it has taken this long for there to be a Supreme Court ruling on the matter of individual right, but now the Second Amendment
stands as do all other rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
For many of us, this has been a long battle and for many an expensive one. In the years since I took up this cause, I have gone from being an annual
member of the National Rifle Association to being a Benefactor Member. I have annual memberships in the Golden Eagles and Second Amendment Task
Force, both of which don't come cheap, not to mention the various donations of time writing letters to legislators and the Presidents of the United
States expressing my views on this subject.
While I don't want to rush into a legal analysis of the ruling which I am not qualified to do, I would assume that this will not put an end to
"sensible gun laws" as the left likes to define their anti-gun agenda. It will, however, place a limit on the incrementally more stringent
definitions of just what "sensible gun laws" are.
Here is what I consider to be the heart of the ruling as found in the synopsis.
The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on
handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose
of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition—in the place
where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement
that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful
purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.
The ruling does not strike down the requirement in some jurisdictions to register firearms and to obtain a license to own, but it does state that the
requirement cannot be applied arbitrarily.
I believe licensure and registration will continued to be challenged in court, so the battle is not over, but we know as of today that our right to
keep and bear arms is intact and safe.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Related News Stories:
Supreme Court Gun Ban Ruling Expected Tomorrow
Related ATS Threads:
High court takes up 2nd Amendment
[edit on 2008/6/26 by GradyPhilpott]