 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Editorials
|
Tuesday, July 01, 2008, 11:52 AM
Gun ruling will help define rights Last week's historic 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the right of an individual to have a gun for self-defense seems to be a well-thought-out ruling that supports the Constitution while recognizing that there are reasons why a government could limit someone's right to own a gun. Surprisingly, it is the first time that this court had ever directly addressed the Constitution's Second Amendment, which reads: "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." Not surprisingly, legal scholars say this ruling is sure to open the floodgates for a host of other legal challenges to existing gun laws across the country. Thursday's ruling in the case District of Columbia v. Heller struck down the District of Columbia's ban on handguns. The ruling also appears to imperil similar prohibitions in other cities such as San Francisco and Chicago. The ruling says that homeowners have the right to have a handgun in the home for self-defense and also struck down requirements that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or be kept disassembled. The ruling does allow the licensing of guns, however. Writing for the five-person majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said an individual right to bear arms exists and is supported by the history of the country both before and after the Second Amendment was written. Scalia wrote that "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," is not permitted by the Constitution. Scalia and the four others who sided with him, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas, are right about this central point. Both the Second Amendment, and the entire thrust of American history, point toward a person's right to own a gun and use it when he legitimately feels that his life is in danger. For much of the history of the country, owning a gun was necessary not only for self-defense but for survival as well. But the ruling goes beyond simply uphold this central tenet, and still gives the District of Columbia and other cities a variety of tools for fighting the rising problem of handgun violence. Scalia noted that nothing in Thursday's ruling should cast any doubt on long-standing prohibition against the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill or the possession of firearms in places such as schools and government buildings.
Add Comment:  (All comments must be approved)
View Comments: (0 comments)
|
|
|
|
