Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
06.26.2008 9:59 am

In its first gun ruling, High Court says they’re OK; yea or nay?

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

From a story by the Associated Press today:

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices’ first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court’s 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia’s 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

I was surprised to hear that the court had never made a definitive ruling on the Second Amendment issue. The amendment says, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Over time, we have come to believe that meant gun ownership by individuals was a Constitutionally protected right. Yet debate on that topic has raged on.

Read the story. Read the ruling (it’s a PDF file). What’s your reaction to the court’s 5-4 opinion?

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5 votes, average: 5 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
101 comments

Comments are closed.

Using logic, what a concept

“Logic demands that there be a link between the stated purpose and the command.”

“We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.”

“the most natural reading of ‘keep Arms’ in the Second Amendment is to “have weapons.”

“The term was applied, then as now, to weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity.”

“Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.“

— AJ
10:09 am June 26th, 2008

Lock and Load! We’re all alot safer now. If someone starts anything with me—guess what?

— Lenny
10:12 am June 26th, 2008

NAY!!!!

— momama
10:18 am June 26th, 2008

OMG…opening this old can of worms again. I have a weapon I inherited, but have never had to use it. I do not carry it. nor do I keep the clip in in my house. When I ran a business that got robbed several times, there was not time to get it it out. They had the drop and it would have caused injury to show the weapon. Everyone walked away unharmed and money can be replaced.

We hear of guns firing in Wal-Mart near kids because momma was a fool and put it in her purse. We have men using guns instead of fists because one was handy. We have guys losing guns to the streets because they felt they had to have one in the car when they visit the t*i*t*t*y bars, but are too scared to take it with them and care for it responsibly.

Without arguing whether we need guns in every house or not, I think we can agree that a lot of the pro-weapon crowd does not take care of their weapons responsibly. Not by a long shot. Pun intended, and a lot of them don’t even know the proper loads to use to avoid injuring bystanders when they do shoot.

I had a mindset where I wanted to carry when I ran those businesses where you may have needed to, but after leaving such an environment, I really feel that was a sick mindset to slip into. I now do business in some rough neighborhoods, and I have never slipped back into that weapons needed mindset. Sometimes just the cocky attitude of being strapped brings you grief you wouldn’t have had otherwise.

As far as the constitution, we seem to pick and choose the constitutional stuff we want to follow. Why not err on the side of safety here? Weapons do not make you safer. You may think you can beat a professional hood at their game with your carries burb guys. You can’t…and they don’t make your genitals bigger either! Too many kids are dying from your legal weapons. More than were killed in the towers each year.

— Slugger
10:25 am June 26th, 2008

It is about time that the 2nd amendment is proven to be a right. Perhaps the draconian restrictions in Illinois, California, New York and other locations can be repealed.

It is alos a great thing that this was ruled on before the Marxist Obama becomes President, because he will be loading so many courts with such left thinking judges that they are going to try and legislate all of our rights away. There is now a set precident.

“Shall not be infringed”

— moduckdoc
10:26 am June 26th, 2008

YEA

— TheArmySarge
10:27 am June 26th, 2008

I have never heard of a gun, in and by it self, up and killing anyone!

Only people kill people, be it with a knife, club, vehicle or gun.

Thank you, I will keep my gun!

— Pugman
10:30 am June 26th, 2008

It’s a good ruling. You can’t continue to take rights away from law abiding citizens because of the few bad ones. I have a few guns. Several for hunting and several just to have them. Don’t carry any with me and don’t intend to. A do have one in my reach at home just in case. The last thing you want is to have someone coming through the window in the middle of the night and not having anything to protect you.

— Tom
10:39 am June 26th, 2008

Well, the Supreme Court got this one right…..

I hunt and shoot recreationally frequently, both rifles and shotguns. I don’t own a handgun, but I used to own several. It’s not up to the government to tell me which ones I should or shouldn’t own. That being said, I don’t support fully automatic weapons among the citizenry.

Gun owners also have a responsibility to use common sense. Mine are kept in a safe, and the ammunition is kept in a separate cabinet under lock and key. Both are kept behind a locked door.

No loaded guns on the nightstand for me, as we have children in the house.

If I lived in the city, I’d probably feel differently.

— JSA
10:51 am June 26th, 2008

FINALLY!
It appears that our Supreme Court is finally using common sense.

-Why carry a gun?………….Because a whole cop would be too heavy.

Tony G.

— Tony G.
10:56 am June 26th, 2008

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 » Show All