
In a 5-4 decision today, the Supreme Court ruled the Washington D.C. ban on handgun ownership unconstitutional.
Quite simply, I am shocked. I have very little faith left in any politician, judge or elected official to follow the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And I certainly don’t expect any politician to believe the words of the Founding Fathers or the Declaration of Independence anymore. So in a way, its a win. A very small one.
However, let me be perfectly clear: the Supreme Court did not stop the ever present and continual onslaught of gun regulations and legislation. Rather, this ruling reaffirms that while they can’t take away your right to own a gun they can regulate it. And we all know that the slippery slope of fascism has had no problem with going the bureaucratic route.
“The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home”
On the surface, those words are a huge win for run-rights hawks. Never before has any court ruled so decisively on the subject.
However, the ruling quickly becomes foggy:
“The court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and governments buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the sale of arms”
In other words: they can’t outright ban you from having a gun. But they can regulate the time, place and manner of firearm possession. We all know the “boiled frog” approach to bureaucracy.
Essentially what the Supreme Court held today was that gun rights can be regulated out of existence over time, just not with an outright ban. Because after all, isn’t every place with two or more persons in/near it a “sensitive area” to law enforcement?