Thursday - June 26, 2008

Heller Decision Released

SCOTUS splits 5-4 ... that alone should scare the shit out of you. This story is fresh out, all over the news, so go look there. And then jump to SCOTUS Blog for a bit of analysis and links to the documents.

At this instant in time I can only call this a tiny victory. The scope of it may take some time to become apparent. Certain things are not to my liking, but better a small victory than a major defeat?

Quotes from SCOTUS Blog:

Examining the words of the Amendment, the Court concluded “we find they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weaons in case of confrontation” — in other words, for self-defense. “The inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right,” it added.

The individual right interpretation, the Court said, ”is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment,” going back to 17th Century England, as well as by gun rights laws in the states before and immediately after the Amendment was put into the U.S. Constitution.

Justice Scalia’s opinion stressed that the Court was not casting doubt on long-standing bans on carrying a concealed gun or on gun possession by felons or the mentally retarded, on laws barring guns from schools or government buildings, and laws putting conditions on gun sales.

In District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290), the Court nullified two provisions of the city of Washington’s strict 1976 gun control law: a flat ban on possessing a gun in one’s home, and a requirement that any gun — except one kept at a business — must be unloaded and disassembled or have a trigger lock in place.  The Court said it was not passing on a part of the law requiring that guns be licensed.  It said that issuing a license to a handgun owner, so the weapon can be used at home, would be a sufficient remedy for the Second Amendment violation of denying any access to a handgun.

Quotes from the robed 9:
“Thus, we do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens to carry arms for any sort of confrontation, just as we do not read the First Amendment to protect the right of citizens to speak for any purpose.”

UPDATE - my goodness, the work that went into this decision. They have dissected each and every word, and every phrase, and it’s alginment and strength relative to every other word and phrase. Then traced the history of each word and phrase, back to the year 1. Now I’m at the part where they discuss the history, and who wrote what when, and what that author meant when he wrote it. And every part they bring up, so far anyway, says essentially “HANDS OFF”. So I’m very interested in reading more to see how they go from these dozens of utterly unequivocal statements to the “it’s Ok for the right to be a limited one” that I think is the bottom line. It’s going to be a long night, or a long couple of days, as I’ve got things to do.

But, seeing how this right is universal to our citizens, I will venture an opinion: do we really need anything more than the Instant Background Check thingy we have today? As long as it can check to see a) have you been convicted of an offense that takes away your right to guns and that penalty still applies? and b) have you been found to be mentally incapable of handling the responsibility, and that judgement still applies? and that the government can be responsible in keeping the data up to date and accurate ... that’s enough. All transactions would have to go through one of these checks, and that’s it. No other rules are needed, anywhere. None. They aren’t needed. Because RIGHTS specify some of the things that you may do, and LAWS punish you for what you have done. It’s a Before and After thing. Anybody who has passed the check should be able to buy, own, and carry any kind of weapon anywhere at any time (my wife adds the interesting viewpoint that on private property if the owner wishes to deny you that right, then it should then become his duty and responsibility to provide security for you!). It is only when you MISUSE that right that the laws come into play. That’s all that laws do. They aren’t made out of magic. Passing a law doesn’t somehow make it impossible to take a certain action. Not at all. At best, law becomes part of a feedback loop; the citizen knows that X is illegal and understands why, and why this is right, and then adds X to the things he or she doesn’t do, and eventually incorporates the idea into their moral base. That’s the only way that law stops anyone from doing anything. For the most part, law only comes around later, after the fact, and puts the bite on you. And that’s my 2 cents at this point.

Posted by Drew458     on 06/26/2008 at 10:22 AM   
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •  
• Comments (9) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner