Return to the Free Liberal Homepage

« Obama is Right on Leviticus | Main | Taking Olbermann and Obama to Task for FISA Support »

"...in the home."

The key passage in yesterday's landmark Second Amendment Supreme Court decision is: The Constitution does not permit “the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home.”

While I'd prefer the qualification be "on one's property," the point is people have the right to protect themselves and their families with potentially lethal force. Arguing the opposite seems utterly untenable, so my view is Scalia and the majority framed this issue properly.

The Supremes move glacially, with the occasional lurch and sometimes those lurches are in a virtuous direction. This is such a time. Time will tell how the Court hones this new direction in jurisprudential thinking. What CAN be prohibited, what CAN be regulated, and where CAN the State limit the carrying and use of firearms remain open questions.

-RC

Posted by Robert Capozzi on June 27, 2008 06:03 AM |

Comments

There is still some question as to whether precendent was ignored. A unanimous decision would have been preferable, although it would have been pretty impossible given who is on the Court.

Regardless, there will be a few actions to enforce this decision - but after a short while, the entire body of Second Amendment law will be considered settled, which will be the death knell for the NRA's fundraising.

Posted by: Michael Bindner | June 27, 2008 10:06 PM

Post a comment

Free-for-all (frfr-ôl) -- n. A disorderly fight, argument, or competition in which everyone present participates.

from Dictionary.com



Advertisement
Free For All -- The Free Liberal Blog