GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES ROLL THE DICE (STUPIDLY!) ON LIKELY LANDMARK ‘RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS’ SECOND AMENDMENT CASE

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Bill Cavala
A veteran of over 30 years in Sacramento

The District of Columbia, marred by gun murders, passed a local ordinance banning the private possession of handguns.

The NRA et. al. filed lawsuits saying the government did not have the right to do so because of the prohibition of the Second Amendment to the Federal Constitution which establishes the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Back in the 1930’s, the US Supreme Court opinioned that the “right to keep and bear arms” was a right held by State Militias and not individual citizens. For the last 80 years, guns zealots have argued that the Court’s interpretation was wrong – that the Founder’s intent was to protect the gun in each American’s home.

For better or worse, however, gun zealots don’t determine the Constitution’s meaning. The US Supreme Court does.

The appeal of the DC gun ban, however, looks likely to renew the debate over the meaning of the Second Amendment. Gun control advocates had urged DC not to appeal their loss in the Appellate Court (which ruled that the Second Amendment did indeed protect the registered gun in your home – that the 1930 opinion was wrong or misconstrued) in order to avoid having the US Supreme Court ratify the appellate decision.

But the gun control attorneys failed. DC will appeal. And now the US Supreme Court will likely answer the question of whether or not the Second Amendment protects the right of the person to keep a registered (as that was the relief sought – to acquire and possess registered conventional guns) gun in the home from the actions of Government.

Court Watchers – myself included – believe the Supreme Court will indeed agree that the Second Amendment protected the rights of individuals and was more than a collective right. Beyond that, who knows?