Senselessness and Guns
Based on the US Constitution it is as plain as day, citizens have the right to bear arms. Unfortunately, there remains sufficient need in the USA for people to arm themselves against others in society who might invade their privacy and assault them with weapons, or simply use a gun in a public place to commit a crime.
The original intent, I think, was to permit citizens to form a militia to protect their interests against an overreaching Federal Government or to enhance the needs of a Federal Government to thwart an invasion from external enemies.
Clear scope, scale, and nature of the problems and environment is exceedingly more complex today than at the time the Constitution was written.
There are many topics in the Constitution defining how government works that may need fresh attention, and quibbling about guns would not be my top priority.
I simply conclude that in this man’s remaining life time, guns will be with us. If that is some measure of human progress, then I guess I don’t understand humanity very well.
“Supreme Court affirms fundamental right to bear arms
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
The Second Amendment provides Americans a fundamental right to bear arms that cannot be violated by state and local governments, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a long-sought victory for gun rights advocates.
The 5 to 4 decision does not strike down any gun-control laws, nor does it elaborate on what kind of laws would offend the Constitution. One justice predicted that an "avalanche" of lawsuits would be filed across the country asking federal judges to define the boundaries of gun ownership and government regulation.
But Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who wrote the opinion for the court's dominant conservatives, said: "It is clear that the Framers . . . counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty."
The decision extended the court's 2008 ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller that "the Second Amendment protects a personal right to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes, most notably for self-defense within the home." That decision applied only to federal laws and federal enclaves such as Washington; it was the first time the court had said there was an individual right to gun ownership rather than one related to military service.”
Most Recommended Comment
Vancouver, B.C., Canada