Griz Bear Comments: : Thursday, a good day for Americans
Posted on Wednesday, July 2, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/gentry/Opinion/2641/
Thursday was a good day, not only for gun owners, but also for supporters of the United States Constitution.
While the case involved a handgun ban and other restrictions in Washington D. C., the courtís decision in District of Columbia v. Heller is far more reaching because the court said the protections guaranteed in the Second Amendment ó ì 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 infringedî ó is a right of the people and not just of state militias.
I was a member of the militia once, in Kansas, the only problem was that I didnít even know of it until I was too old and kicked out because of my age. If youíre wondering how that could be, itís because the stateís constitution says all able-bodied males between the ages of 21 and 45 are militiamen.
In case you men from Arkansas feel left out, the Arkansas Constitution defines its militia as all able-bodied men between 18 and 45. So some of you might be in the militia and not even know it. Women, Iím sorry; if you want to be a soldier, youíll have to join the Army or the stateís National Guard.
Since many opponents of gun rights have argued that the amendment applied only to militias, had the Supreme Court ruled differently, my rights and the rights of women and anyone over 45 to own a firearm for hunting, target shooting or self defense and personal protection would have been gone ó and probably for good. Fortunately for ìwe the people, î five of the nine justices recognized that the constitutional right was a right of the people and not just a right of militiamen.
It really shouldnít have been that tough of a case to decide. The Constitution is quite clear when it says, ì ÖThe right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. î
One headline I read about the courtís decision even said: ì Court rules Second Amendment means what it says. î Isnít that amazing ! Whatís shocking ó and disappointing ó is that four justices didnít see it that way.
Another positive point of the ruling is that it should shift the focus of gun rhetoric away from the all-too-common comments about certain types of guns not being suitable for sporting purposes. Since the Supreme Court has ruled that the people have the right to own guns for purposes of being secure, the people should also be able to own and carry guns designed for self defense ó including handguns and long guns capable of firing multiple rounds, which arenít really designed for hunting or target shooting.
While the ruling was a victory for your rights and mine, it wasnít as big a victory as it could have been. The decision should have been unanimous in favor of the rights of the people. Of course, plain and simple decisions become clouded by the dust and dirt stirred up by political whims of the times. Some would still wrest away guaranteed rights and ignore the plain and simple language of the amendment. Hopefully, it will be a long, long time before a future and more liberal court decides to revisit the issue.
Then, too, there were those exceptions to the ruling which still allow states and local governments to restrict the peopleís right to keep and bear arms. The question then becomes how far those restrictions can go and still pass a courtís approval.
Yes, I know some are disappointed with the ruling because they oppose the ownership of guns by anybody and everybody. But they should really be happy about the ruling since it upheld ó at least partially ó a constitutional right.
Next time, it could be a challenge to the peopleís rights to free speech, to practice their faith or to expect privacy on oneís person or in oneís home. If the Supreme Court had followed a path of altering the clear meaning of the Constitution to fit the mood of the moment, it could have eventually meant the loss of all individual rights.
And, you never know, the day could come when even an anti-gunner might decide a gun is needed for his or her own personal protection. Iíve seen anti-gun people change their minds when it was their lives or properties which were at stake.
It was a good thing for all of us ó whether or not we choose to own guns ó that the High Court defended the peopleís right to do so. Yes, Thursday was a good day for all Americans.