SCOTUSblog reported Answering a 217-year old constitutional question, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to have a gun, at least in one’s home. The Court, splitting 5-4, struck down a District of Columbia ban on handgun possession. Although times have changed since 1791, Justice Antonin Scalia said for the majority, “it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” The opinion can be downloaded here. Relevant quotes from the majority opinion can be found here, and a replay of our LiveBlog can be found here. Tom’s commentary is here.
This is good news, but I wish it had been more than a 5-4 decision.
This is good news, but I wish it had been more than a 5-4 decision.
4 comments:
Hi Don,
In my life I have come across a situation where two young boys were hunting in the wee hours of the morning and one boy shot the
other. Although I do think everyone has a constitutional right to a gun, I don't believe we live in the "wild west" anymore. Accidents happen, but again, we don't live in a safe world. It is a Catch 22. Personally, I don't like guns at all. I never handled one, nor do I intend to. Should it be necessary for me to defend myself, I could think of other means of survival. Too many accidents happen "around the house". I cannot honestly defend either side of this hot topic.
ANON
If they were hunting with a bow and arrow they could have hurt someone too.
If you don't like guns you should not be required to own one.
People cut themselves with knives "around the house", and they slip in the bathtub. That does not mean we should get rid of knives and bathtubs. We should just be careful.
Don, I agree with you - you can trip and fall and split your head open - I did this once and spent a whole day in the emergency room. Danger lurks everywhere. I sincerely believe that there are right places to be and wrong places to be. It's the luck of the draw. ANON
I read both opinions. Justice Scalia rightly refers to the dissent's reasoning as "worthy of the mad hatter." These four dissenting judges KNOW that the framers intended the Second Amendment to protect an individual right. Only a fool can look at the historical record and reason otherwise. They decided to betray the Constitution and substitute their own opinions in its place. In my view, they should be tried, convicted, and punished for high treason.
Post a Comment