Here are my initial thoughts on the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in the Columbia Vs. Heller case.
The decision appears to be fair, balanced and appropriate. The decision clarifies that the right to bear arms (for self defense) is applicable not only for the militia but also for individuals. But this is not an absolute right. A community may impose reasonable restrictions on gun ownership but the court felt that the DC gun ban went too far.
While it is not clear, the decision does not appear to negatively impact most of the existing federal, state, and local gun safety laws including the federal Brady law and such proposed federal laws as the assault weapons ban and gun show loophole bill. However, this is merely inferential — many individuals and groups will test the limits of this decision by challenging many of the existing laws. Cities, counties, states and even the federal government have to be ready to confront legal challenges to the existing laws. That’s inevitable — only through legal disputes, however costly it may be for the defendants, the scope of this decision will become clear.
Today’s decision is not a win for any one group — advocates of tough gun controls or no gun controls or the National Rifle Association — and therefore, it is probably a win for the society and the constitution.
By re-affirming that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the court probably took the gun issue out of the fall Presidential campaign. Republicans may now have a very hard time arguing that if you elect Democrats they will take away your guns. However, Obama will be constantly pestered by McCain and the media about his stance and opinions on this matter. Obama’s statements have to be calibrated and reassuring.
Tags: Barack Obama, gun ownership, John McCain, NRA, Second Amendment Rights, U.S. Supreme Court
