Skip to content

Supreme Court Appears Ready to Back an Individual’s Right to Bear Arms

March 18, 2008

 On March 16th I wrote this post about the supreme court hearing a case about gun control in Washington D.C. This is a very important case on the second amendment as the supreme court is going to rule on whether individuals have the right to bear arms, or if the amendment only applies to state militias.

  The court heard the arguments this morning and will now have several weeks to make a final decision. It is being reported here, and on Fax News, that the supreme court is prepared to rule that individuals do have the right to keep and bear arms.

The US Supreme Court appears ready to rule that Americans have a constitutional right to keep a gun in their home for self-defence, a ruling that could help Republicans in the upcoming presidential election.Hearing the most important gun rights case in nearly 70 years, the justices on Tuesday spent 98 minutes engrossed in a lively debate about British and American legal traditions relating to the right to bear arms, especially in self-defence.

 The court will now reportedly use the next few weeks to decide on what, or if any restrictions can be placed on gun ownership. This is a huge victory for second amendment advocates. This ruling had the possibility of shaking up the very structure of one of the basic rights guaranteed under the constitution. The court actually had to rule on whether individuals have the right to bear arms, and they are reported to have passed this test. Now it will be very interesting to see the type of restrictions that they rule are acceptable.

 The supreme court seems to have made a great decision on the first part of the argument, now we will see if they continue to support the second amendment with their next decision, which is due in late May or early June.

 I have written before about what I feel President Bush’s most enduring and profound legacy will be when looked back upon many years from now. I believe that his two supreme court appointees will be and have the most positive effects on the country, and will shape the future of the country for many years to come. If this decision is a sign of things to come. we are off to a good start.

5 Comments leave one →
  1. yoda's avatar
    yoda permalink
    March 18, 2008 8:17 pm

    Dont be so sure..Bush is an idiot and his appointees are federalists, who support more government power than less…Bush/Cheney is all about federal power. They may let you keep your glock but they will spy on you and crush you like an ant.

    Like

  2. Sean's avatar
    Sean permalink
    March 18, 2008 9:08 pm

    I wouldn’t be so sure, GW is no friend of personal liberty and certainly no friend of an empowered citizenry.

    Bush on guns:
    Avoid Columbine via gun control, values & character ed. (Apr 2000)
    Would sign, but would not push, gun restrictions. (Apr 2000)
    Ban automatic weapons & high-capacity ammunition clips. (Apr 2000)
    More laws & enforcement on juveniles with guns. (Apr 2000)
    Best gun control is more prosecution & certain jail. (Dec 1999)
    Raise legal age for guns to 21; ban certain ammo. (Aug 1999)
    No child-safety locks on guns; concealed carrying ok. (Jun 1999)
    No city lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jun 1999)
    Gun restrictions OK within basic right to own guns. (May 1999)

    Like

  3. thatsrightnate's avatar
    thatsrightnate permalink
    March 18, 2008 10:34 pm

    I think you’re very right about Bush’s legacy.

    Like

  4. Steve Dennis's avatar
    March 19, 2008 4:50 am

    Yoda, Bush has less than one year to go, let it go. You will feel much better if you do
    Sean, this is the supreme court making this decision, not Bush.
    Thanks, Nate. I think his judges will leave a profound imprint on the future of the country..

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. More on the Supreme Court’s Washington DC Gun Control Decision « Wake Up America

Leave a reply to yoda Cancel reply