Supreme Court Will Hear Gun Case
Posted on November 20, 2007
Via Hot Air: the Supreme Court will hear a significant case on the second amendment. We will finally get a decision on what “well regulated militia” means.
The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether the District of Columbia can ban handguns, a case that could produce the most in-depth examination of the constitutional right to “keep and bear arms†in nearly 70 years…
The government of Washington, D.C., is asking the court to uphold its 31-year ban on handgun ownership in the face of a federal appeals court ruling that struck down the ban as incompatible with the Second Amendment. Tuesday’s announcement was widely expected, especially after both the District and the man who challenged the handgun ban asked for the high court review.
I don’t think I need to weigh in on where we stand on this issue. It is the exact opposite of the ACLU. However, two presidential candidates are taking advantage of the moment.
In an attempt to prop up his tarnished record on guns, Rudy G weighs in:
“I strongly believe that Judge Silberman’s decision deserves to be upheld by the Supreme Court. The Parker decision is an excellent example of a judge looking to find the meaning of the words in the Constitution, not what he would like them to mean.”
Fred Thompson weighs in as well:
“The Second Amendment does more than guarantee to all Americans an unalienable right to defend one’s self. William Blackstone, the 18th century English legal commentator whose works were well-read and relied on by the Framers of our Constitution, observed that the right to keep and bear firearms arises from ‘the natural right of resistance and self-preservation.’ This view, reflected in the Second Amendment, promotes both self-defense and liberty.”
» Filed Under 2nd Amendment, ACLU, News
Trackback URL
Comments
2 Responses to “Supreme Court Will Hear Gun Case”























Happy Thanksgiving My Friend.
eric aka http://www.blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com
This is a no-brainer. D.C. has overstepped its constitutional authority as this is a definite infringement of the right to own arms. The question I ask doe D.C. have the obligation to maintain a militia.