Alternate title - To Heller and Back
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.All this emphasis on the home makes me think CCW is the next target of the Brady Bunch, but I haven't read the whole thing yet.
Chalk up one for the good guys.
4 comments:
This should be Exhibit A on why the President's ability to nominate jutices is so important. I would actually love to see a few more cases go through so this court can further define the rights of armed citizens.
Well, one of the main arguments the gun controllers used (collective right) has been dashed, so I'm sure there will be other challenges, from both sides, in the future.
The free, law-abiding citizenry of this country is the first-line militia being necessary to the security of this free State. We are the People who have a creator-given right to protect our liberty via keeping and bearing arms. This government shall not infringe on this freedom.
The concept of a universal militia, consisting of all free people bearing their own arms, originated in England many generations ago. Madison did not invent the right to keep and bear arms when he drafted the Second Amendment - the right was pre-existing at both common law and in the early state constitutions. But the Founders of this country saw this concept as so important that they put it down in writing, no less important that the rights of free speech and free worship.
Still and all, I am well-pleased with this decision from the nation’s highest court. Now maybe the local tin-horn dictators (commonly known as mayors and councilpersons) will back off and allow law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from the plague of crime that they have helped empower.
Yeah, it's a good start.
Post a Comment