[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Supreme Court Stuns Millions of Gun Owners With First Post-Scalia Ruling Supreme Court Stuns Millions of Gun Owners With First Post-Scalia Ruling Since the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia, conservatives have grown increasingly concerned about the fate of their 2nd Amendment rights. Scalia was a staunch advocate for gun rights, and the Justice nominated to replace him, Merrick Garland, doesn’t come close to matching his zeal for the 2nd Amendment. It would be an understatement to say that gun rights became exceedingly vulnerable when Scalia left the court. Thankfully though, it appears that the situation may not be as dire as we first thought. In fact, the Court just shocked everyone by releasing a decidedly pro-gun decision. The Conservative Tribune explains: "A decision released Monday, however, has been hailed a victory for gun rights, and conservatives everywhere will be relieved to see the court standing up for the Constitution even without Scalia. "The court overturned a decision out of Massachusetts that determined that stun guns were not covered by the Second Amendment, siding instead with a woman who said she carried one as protection against an abusive former boyfriend. "In an unsigned decision with no dissents, the country’s highest court ruled in favor of Jaime Caetano, who in 2011 was arrested for possession of a stun gun in violation of a state law banning such weapons. Caetano said she carried the stun gun for self-defense because her former partner was violent and abusive. "In March 2015, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the stun gun was not covered by the constitutional right to bear arms. The Supreme Court, however, decided that ruling was inconsistent with a 2008 Supreme Court decision declaring an individual right to bear arms. "The 2008 case, District of Columbia v. Heller, had left open many questions about the extent of the individual right, the firearms covered and when government regulations would stand. Although the latest decision does not further clarify many of the case’s unanswered questions, it does require the Massachusetts court to hear it again in light of the 2008 decision. In doing so, it sent a message to lower courts that there is a broad range of weapons covered by the Second Amendment. "In a concurring opinion, Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas wanted that message to be even stronger. "If the fundamental right of self-defense does not protect Caetano, then the safety of all Americans is left to the mercy of state authorities who may be more concerned about disarming the people than about keeping them safe," Alito wrote, according to USA Today. "Massachusetts, like liberals across the country, tried to argue that stun guns should not be protected because that type of weapon would not have been the type Congress envisioned in 1789 when it adopted the Second Amendment. "Fortunately, the justices rejected that approach. Perhaps they know that the same logic could be applied to other constitutional guarantees. Imagine if we applied the same approach to the First Amendment. Would online forms of media not be covered by freedom of the press just because the Founders may not have “envisioned” the World Wide Web when they wrote those sacred words? "Conservatives everywhere should be rejoicing at this post-Scalia gun rights decision, but there will undoubtedly be more and more anti-Second Amendment cases coming up that we must keep an eye on." Despite the fact that we shouldn’t be surprised when the Supreme Court stands in favor of the Constitution, the concerns of conservatives about whether or not the Court would remain unbiased after Scalia’s passing are very well founded. All we can do now is hope that this trend continues and that the Court didn’t simply make this decision to pacify gun owners and get them to stop paying attention. Poster Comment: Those rascals in Massachusetts tried to slip one in on us. Even though the founders may not have envisioned "stun guns" they are still a weapon that is used to disable or even disarm an attacker. Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: BTP Holdings (#0)
And still no real investigation, that I've heard of, into the death of Scalia.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||