Conservatism is... The Right to Bear Arms
How the Second Amendment Keeps us Safe and Free
Michael Koenig
Last Updated: 12/29/09 Section: Opinion
The basis for the ruling was grounded in a clause-by-clause critical interpretation of the Second Amendment along with close analysis of past jurisprudence and legislation. When compared to similar laws, definitions and state constitutions of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, the majority opinion found, the Second Amendment clearly refers to the individual, private ownership of weapons. There has recently been much debate as to whether the Second Amendment was intended to apply to about individual people or only militias; the Heller ruling has now ruled that it explicitly refers about an enumerated right, which is not unlimited, to ordinary citizens. Like all other enumerated rights in the Bill of Rights, no branch of government is allowed to decide if it need always be obeyed or followed (whereas, for example, Congress can choose not to use its right to regulate interstate commerce). Rather, the only way to restrict the freedoms guaranteed by the Second Amendment would be to further amend the Constitution. The most important question of the gun debate - if citizens' right to possess firearms actually exists - has been met with a resounding yes from the highest court in the land.
In Heller, the Court stated that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to keep commonly-used firearms in their homes or on their person for the purpose of self defense and, if necessary, in service to the militia. According to the Supreme Court, the only way that the government can definitively regulate firearms is to make them unavailable to those who are unfit (e.g. felons or the mentally ill), ban them from sensitive areas (e.g. schools, prisons, government buildings) and to prohibit the sale of unusual weapons (e.g. flamethrowers, sawed-off shotguns or bazookas). Such regulation cannot, however, prevent law-abiding citizens from legally keeping and using firearms for lawful purposes. Nor can it prevent citizens from using deadly force in defending their lives and property when intruders enter their homes, a principle commonly known as the Castle Doctrine.
In Heller, the Court stated that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to keep commonly-used firearms in their homes or on their person for the purpose of self defense and, if necessary, in service to the militia. According to the Supreme Court, the only way that the government can definitively regulate firearms is to make them unavailable to those who are unfit (e.g. felons or the mentally ill), ban them from sensitive areas (e.g. schools, prisons, government buildings) and to prohibit the sale of unusual weapons (e.g. flamethrowers, sawed-off shotguns or bazookas). Such regulation cannot, however, prevent law-abiding citizens from legally keeping and using firearms for lawful purposes. Nor can it prevent citizens from using deadly force in defending their lives and property when intruders enter their homes, a principle commonly known as the Castle Doctrine.
Be the first to comment on this story