Frank Borelli
Editor-in-Chief
Officer.com
Well, Pilgrims... they've issued their "verdict". The Supreme Court has ruled, in a 5-4 decision, that the 2nd Amendment does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home." While that one line seems like the Supreme Court wanted to strike down the DC law in question without stepping so far as to say the 2nd Amendment guaranteed an individual right, the 157 page opinion is quite explicit.
The Supreme Court held that, "The Second Amendment
protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home." (emphasis mine)
Further the published opinion states, "The District's total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of 'arms' that American overhwelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense." As the District of Columbia isn't the only city which had such a ban (Chicago comes to mind) it will be interesting to see how this decision affects weapon laws in other places.
As I was keeping my eyes open for this particular opinion, when I saw that it had been released on a television newscast I immediately went to the internet to search out the opinion. On typical news webpages I found reports of the decision with each "reporter" obviously spinning the decision in line with his or her own feelings about gun control. Only on the National Rifle Association's Institute For Legislative Action website did I find a link to the entire opinion in PDF format.
I think it's interesting that the decision was 5 to 4. Four Justices of the Supreme Court felt that the District's complete ban on handguns, and its prohibition against possessing operable rifles or shotguns
even in your home was Constitutional. Parts of the published opinion cite testimony from a survivor at Virginia Tech who felt stronger gun laws are necessary.
While I happen to agree with the Supreme Court's opinion in this case, I know that there are plenty of readers who don't. I invite all readers to submit their opinion on whether the SCOTUS got this one right or wrong and, more importantly,
why.
