The Washington Post Ignores Right to Bear Arms

Ammoland ^ | 29 January, 2018 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

In an article about shall issue carry permits in Washington, D.C., the authors, Peter Hermann and Peter Jamison, ignore half of the rights contained in the Second Amendment. It is rather odd, considering it is the main topic of their article.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down the “may issue” law in D.C. specifically.  Here is an excerpt from Wrenn that shows how strong the opinion is.

From Wrenn v. D.C.:

Our first question is whether the Amendment’s “core” extends to publicly carrying guns for self-defense. The District argues that it does not, citing Heller I’s observation that “the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute” in the home. Id. at 628. But the fact that the need for self-defense is most pressing in the home doesn’t mean that self-defense at home is the only right at the Amendment’s core. After all, the Amendment’s “core lawful purpose” is self-defense, id. at 630, and the need for that might arise beyond as well as within the home. Moreover, the Amendment’s text protects the right to “bear”as well as “keep”arms. For both reasons, it’s more natural to view the Amendment’s core as including a law-abiding citizen’s right to carry common firearms for self-defense beyond the home (subject again to relevant “longstanding” regulations like bans on carrying “in sensitive places”). Id. at 626.

This reading finds support in parts of Heller I that speak louder than the Court’s aside about where the need for guns is “most acute.” That remark appears when Heller I turns to the particular ban on

[marktwain]

The Washington Post could not even include the "right to bear arms" in the article. They only briefly mentioned the right to own guns.

[wastoute]

It occurs to me in these tumutuous times whether there might also be an interpretation of the 2ndA that allows citizens to be armed not only to defend against tyrannical gummint but to be able to meet a civic duty to PROTECT a legitimate government from attack?

[WayneS]

Anyone waiting for the WaPo to publish a fair article or editorial about the 2nd Amendment is in for a very long wait. I recommend bringing along a chair, bottled water and some snacks...

[Mollypitcher1]

Anyone waiting for the WaPo to publish a fair article or editorial about the 2nd Amendment is in for a very long wait. I recommend bringing along a chair, bottled water and some snacks...
.........................................
I agree with your idea, but think you are a bit optimistic. I would bring along a tent, sleeping bag, lots of rations, and use the WAPO for lighting my campfire.

[Romulus]

Elites don’t like civil rights. They like privilege.

[Hugh the Scot]

Of course there is.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...”

Right there. It’s not just an interpretation that covers the subject, it’s a direct reading.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

The Washington Post prides itself on being anti-gun since around 1962. Herblock cartoons constantly reviled the ownership of guns and the NRA.

[Celerity]

When CT was having the “Starbucks open carry” event, I went to a Starbucks in Newtown. I wasn’t even open carrying. But the protesters (Anti-gun) outside numbered between 10 and 15 people.

I tried the door, and it was locked. They told me that the owner decided to close down his store for the day because he didn’t want to deal with it.

I asked the protesters, as just a plain citizen “Why they would do that” and I got the typical “We’re here to make sure gun owners know they can’t frighten us” blah blah.

I pointed out that there were no gun owners there, only anti-gun protesters and that THEY made him shut his store down. Their response was one of the most golden moments I’ve ever had...

“It’s our first amendment right to be here, regardless of what they say or think.”

Anti-gunners are, at best, shills fighting for our overlords.

[from occupied ga]

I believe that the WaPo once ran anti-gun editorials for 270+ days in a row (in the 60’s I think).

[PROCON]

RKBA Ping List

This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.

FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.

More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Liberals cannot find the right of the people to keep and bear arms in the Constitution but they are sure that the right to abortion and the separation of church and state is in there somewhere.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Hugh is right.