Posted on 02/27/2012 7:35:49 AM PST by neverdem
Over the last few years, the Second Amendment has experienced somewhat of a rebirth, thanks largely to a pair of Supreme Court decisions: District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.
In these seminal decisions, the Supreme Court affirmed the understanding of the Founding Fathers that there is indeed an individual right to keep and bear arms, a God-given right to protect oneself that is guaranteed to us in the Second Amendment to our Constitution. Cities with oppressive restrictions on guns, including the District of Columbia and Chicago, have been forced to at least recognize that they cannot simply deny citizens their right to possess firearms. At the same time, however, these cities continue to erect barriers to citizens seeking to exercise their rights.
In other words, despite the victories in the Supreme Court, the battle for Second Amendment rights in America is far from over. There is perhaps no better reminder of this unfortunate state of affairs than a recent ruling by U.S. District Judge Sue Myerscough, an appointee of President Barack Obama.
Two pro-Second Amendment groups — the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Illinois Carry — filed a lawsuit last May challenging the ban on carrying concealed guns in the Land of Lincoln, which is the only state with a complete ban on the books. The common-sense basis for the lawsuit is that Illinois’ ban on concealed carry deprives citizens of the fundamental right of self-defense, simply because they are in public.
While Judge Myerscough conceded the Second Amendment protects a “general right to carry guns that include a right to carry operable guns in public,” she tossed out the lawsuit, claiming that the “Supreme Court has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home.”
As absurd as this federal judge’s ruling appears on the surface, it unfortunately finds some basis in the inchoate opinion issued four years ago by the nation’s high court in Heller. While the five-member majority in that case importantly recognized the fundamental right of an individual to keep and bear arms — and in so finding, invalidated the District’s restrictive gun control ordinance — the actual language of the opinion has been interpreted now to recognize the right to possess a firearm only inside one’s home.
Common sense, and a fair reading of the history of the Second Amendment, leads to the obvious conclusion that its guarantee of the “right to keep and bear arms” was never intended to be limited to intra-home firearms. Unfortunately, the uncertainty created by the pinched opinion in Heller — which may have been necessary to secure the fifth vote (Justice Anthony Kennedy) — is now causing serious damage to firearms rights, as is manifest in Judge Myerscough’s recent ruling.
SAF and Illinois Carry are taking their case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. But the lower court’s ruling does drive home a couple of important points.
First, the U.S. Senate needs to stop sitting on its hands, and pass the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act (H.R. 822), which received overwhelming support in the House last November (passing 272 to 154). This legislation would treat concealed carry licenses much like driver’s licenses, through the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution, and require states to recognize concealed carry permits from other states.
Perhaps even more important, however, this ruling by a lifetime-tenured federal judge reminds us of the importance of presidential appointments to the federal bench — and the severe damage to our Second Amendment rights that can be expected from a second term for President Barack Obama.
Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He provides regular commentary to Daily Caller readers.
So...I just freaked out hubby by going out and ‘checking everything’.
Two rifles and one pistol, no “safety” unless you consider “half cocked” a “safety”.
Everything else has them.
[and everything I shot as a kid didn’t]
Twisted leftist garbage for all to see, she should be removed from the bench for shear stupidity.
Crazy salamander. Living on the edge!
You could shoot your child like some idiot who had a round chambered and the safety off. Even though you don’t keep a round chambered with the safety off.
But it could happen if you did what you never did! Indeed!
(To the ozarka ninnie, The reason nobody carries rifles in the back glass anymore is because there are so many SOBs out there who’d break the glass and take it.)
It needs an appeal NOW before the next election in the event
Obama is re-elected.
Right now SCOTUS is leaning in our direction. An Obama election will put another Kagan or Soto-Mayor on the Court.
Technically, yes. In terms of the issue really crossing that threshold into public awareness, nope. It's analogous to the border problem; some (a relative few) saw it and warned for years before the discussion went more mainstream.
Uh, OK, I'll bite. How are the statements that there is "a right to carry operable guns in public" and that SCOTUS "has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home" not contradictory? Is this fsck-wit now asserting that MY HOME is "public" space???
Ha!
Ever since I verified that _3_ deadly firearms are just waiting for me in that room, with *no* safety whatsoever, I’m skeered to go back in there.
They could be....just....waiting....
[I have no kids and so far, the Boa’s only figured out the rifle scopes and the pump on the Mossberg. I think levers, hammers and triggers might be a little too abstract for him]
Never had anybody break out the glass in our truck.
Maybe they were afraid the noise would wake up the Dobermanns.
:)
“now asserting that MY HOME is “public” space??? “
To the cop who’ll shoot your yard dog, it is.
>>“Supreme Court has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home.”
>
>So what other Rights in the Constitution don’t apply outside the home: free speech, trial by jury, cruel and unusual punishment, blacks not being slaves, women voting??
Yes, all of them.
And let’s not forget that imaginings can be construed to provide the “public use” for the justification of Imminent Domain. (2005, Kelo, ‘imaginings’ = projection.)
They tried that crap here in WV. A lot of people started asking for warrants and then kicking the DNR people off their land and threatening to have them prosecuted for trespassing.
Just because they are DNR does not give them the right to trespass on private property.
I grew up in Maryland, and shot on the rifle team of my High School. The range was in the school basement. The school sold us ammo to raise money. Rifles were carried through the halls.
The state is ruined.
I have owned and own revolver's. Single action, and double action. They are in a class of their own...safety wise. I won't go into that here.
But I'd be interested in your "safety-less" rifles...What are they exactly. Brand's and models.......
First, the U.S. Senate needs to stop sitting on its hands, and pass the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act (H.R. 822), which received overwhelming support in the House last November (passing 272 to 154). This legislation would treat concealed carry licenses much like driver’s licenses, through the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution, and require states to recognize concealed carry permits from other states.
I'm sorry to disagree with Bob Barr, but this is quite precisely an invasion of States' Rights and the Tenth Amendment, and a typical example of the three-dimensional chess people like to play when a State's sovereignty becomes "inconvenient".
It's also the same game that homosexualist NGO's have been playing for 30 years, as they drive to achieve their nirvana of criminal trials and convictions for any and all murmurers against homosexuality and their evil goals.
That said, the Second Amendment is self-binding, so I wonder why Barr bothers with an appeal to the Full Faith & Credit clause. We are going to have to do something about amending FF&C anyway, as homosexual agitators work to spread their social decay.
Truth is, this battle will NEVER be over.
You fellerz and yer boats...Don’t y’all know how to secure stuff anymore??? Geesh!!! ;-)
I await your reply to my response to your post.........
FRegards,
***** “ Newt is the only candidate in my lifetime willing to use the Constitutional power our Framers designed for us to check the Judiciary.” ******
Yes but Sadly through all of the debates we had MSM Moderators that would never ask the questions that actually compare one Candidate to the other.
I am SOOOOO Done with MSM ... cannot wait until they are are Bankrupt (and then Bailed out by 0bama) so the whole world can see that they are nothing but a PAC for the Obama Admin
PO’d TT
**** “[I have no idea who was shooting over there but they sounded like they were taking out a whole herd of deer]” ****
Prolly just had some old ammo that needed disposing or selling a Rifle (just to demonstrate)
or felt the need to hear the “SOUND OF FREEDOM”
TT
You’ve made some homepage changes since my last visit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.