Steven P. BarrettNRA WINS AWFUL, AWFUL RULING: COWBOY (LINK)
June 26th 2008 16:55
LOOKS LIKE THE ROBERTS' SUPREME COURT'S DECIDED TO COWBOY UP AND LEFT THE LAND OF SAFE JURISPRUDENCE AND HEADED OFF INTO THE NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION' VERSION OF FRONTIERLAND FOR ITS SUMMER VACATION.
Forgive the sarcasm, but this is one awfull, awfull, awfull ruling. It's always bad enough to see a sharply divided 5 to 4 ruling on such controversial issues, but this decision's going to create an even stronger cowboy culture than we already have -- wh ich is more than we need in the first place.
I can understand the arguments put forth by law abiding citizens. And most law abiding gun owners would no doubt be willing to even have themselves psychologically checked out if necessary to demonstrate their worthiness of owning firearms.
But that's not going to sail with the National Rifle Association, nor does it look like it'd pas the muster of the Robert -- or should I say -- Scalia Court.
According to the Washington Post's story (posted today) by Frank Barnes,
Take a close look at that last paragraph, then think back at some of those stories you've probably read about kids being able to get into their parents or grandparents' gun lockers, and taking those weapons out to use on other kids and teachers.
Thanks to this ruling, even any chances of requiring responsible adults to do the responsible thing--without without the force of ordinances--and make them extremely difficult to get at -- are ... hell, just kiss those chances goodbye.
God forbid we have to kiss anything (permanently goodbye) even more precious than simple legal precautions that we should be able to count on our justices to uphold -- even in the the name of commonsense jurisprudence.
Forgive the sarcasm, but this is one awfull, awfull, awfull ruling. It's always bad enough to see a sharply divided 5 to 4 ruling on such controversial issues, but this decision's going to create an even stronger cowboy culture than we already have -- wh ich is more than we need in the first place.
I can understand the arguments put forth by law abiding citizens. And most law abiding gun owners would no doubt be willing to even have themselves psychologically checked out if necessary to demonstrate their worthiness of owning firearms.
But that's not going to sail with the National Rifle Association, nor does it look like it'd pas the muster of the Robert -- or should I say -- Scalia Court.
According to the Washington Post's story (posted today) by Frank Barnes,
The 5 to 4 decision was written by Justice Antonin Scalia, and went beyond what the Bush administration had counseled. It said that the government may impose some restrictions on gun ownership, but that the District's strictest-in-the-nation ban went too far under any interpretation.
Scalia wrote that the Constitution leaves the District a number of options for combating the problem of handgun violence, "including some measures regulating handguns."
"But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table," he continued. "These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home."
The court also held unconstitutional the requirement that shotguns and rifles be kept either dissassembled or unloaded or outfitted with a triggerlock. The court called it a "prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense."
Scalia wrote that the Constitution leaves the District a number of options for combating the problem of handgun violence, "including some measures regulating handguns."
"But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table," he continued. "These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home."
The court also held unconstitutional the requirement that shotguns and rifles be kept either dissassembled or unloaded or outfitted with a triggerlock. The court called it a "prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense."
Thanks to this ruling, even any chances of requiring responsible adults to do the responsible thing--without without the force of ordinances--and make them extremely difficult to get at -- are ... hell, just kiss those chances goodbye.
God forbid we have to kiss anything (permanently goodbye) even more precious than simple legal precautions that we should be able to count on our justices to uphold -- even in the the name of commonsense jurisprudence.
| 45 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
