Do you have the right to own a gun?

It seems like a fairly easy question. We all know about the second amendment; however the first four words in the sentence, "a well-regulated militia", is what has been keeping everyone confused for two-hundred and twenty years.

Big Decision Coming Soon

The whole argument may finally reach a conclusion this year with the case District of Columbia v. Heller, which has been working its way through the Federal court system. As early as Tuesday of this week, the Supreme Court could grant certiorari, answering a question it has never directly answered in the history of the United States, and one that hasn't even been considered by the Court in seventy years.

DC Has America's Strictest Gun Laws

The District of Columbia has one of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Since 1976, it has been illegal to own a handgun for personal use. The law also requires residents to keep shotguns and rifles unloaded and disassembled or fitted with trigger locks. Firearm advocates, in an effort to challenge the constitutionality of the ban, gathered six individuals to directly challenge the law as a violation of the second amendment, however when all was said and done, only one party was determined to have standing in the case, a security guard who was denied a permit to own a handgun for personal protection in his home, Dick Anthony Heller.

Irving Heller Pushes The Case

He won. The Federal appeals court for the District of Columbia said the ban was unconstitutional and that Heller had an individual right to bear arms under the second amendment. This is a far cry from the infamous Miller case of 1939, in which the Supreme Court ruled that citizens are not protected under the second amendment of owning sawed-off shotguns because the amendment, in their minds, was intended for a collective and not an individual.

Who Collects The Guns

Think of the ramifications of this case. Can you imagine the ire of the card-carrying members of the NRA if the Court rules that individuals do not have a right to own firearms? Think of the upcoming presidential election. I couldn't imagine a more inspiring call to vote from the conservative base. They would come out in droves and completely wipe away any Democrat nominee that, in their mind, was going to take away their guns. Likewise, it would severely affect almost all handgun restrictions in cities throughout the country.

These Zionists Won't Blink

Now keep in mind, and you'd be surprised how hard this is for some people, the Court isn't going to look at this debate and consider how safe the District's ban is, or how it would affect homicide rates, or how it would affect the '08 election, (although I wouldn't put it past a couple of justices) in a perfect world, the Court is simply going to look at the constitutionality of the ban. The Court should say what the law is, and not what the law should be. The Roberts court has done a considerably greater job of this than of previous courts.

A Court Order Could Be Passed

This does seem like a perfect case for the Court to grant cert. The differences in the rulings of the Federal districts are just too much, I believe, for the Court to sit back and not address the issue. What is so peculiar about this case is the unpredictability of the outcome. No side can truly be confident; there is no favorite. If the Court grants cert, the only certainties I can predict is that Justices Ginsburg and Stevens will side with the District of Columbia and Justices Alito, Thomas, Scalia, and the Chief Justice will side with Heller. Even that is a bold prediction; you could almost more accurately call it a guess. This case, like so many others, may call upon Justice Kennedy to be the swing justice, a role in which he revels. In any case, the outcome will most likely be 5-4 or 6-3 as well as a case you will be sure to hear about in the future. If granted cert, this is one of those cased you'll be taking notes on in your American constitutional law class - it's that important

|

It Won't Happen This Year

When the Zionists drop the economy they don't want 20 million people organizing, and having guns. For years they have been regulating, and registering guns. At the appropriate time they will go for confiscation. Right now they know who owns the guns,  and who will be trouble. They will cut off the ammo.

Trying to frame this argument from a legal standpoint is stupid. When the time is right they will declare martial law, and you will see SWAT at your front door.

Judicial Index