In an historical landmark ruling today, the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that individuals do have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. The case involved a 60 year-old security officer in Washington, D.C., who attempted to register a handgun for home security. When his request was denied, the security officer sued the city on the grounds that he believed Washington's ban on firearms to be unconstitutional. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court found that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right granted by the 2nd Amendment.
The point has been debated over the years, with opponents arguing the 2nd Amendment applies to applications of a militia or other government-managed groups. Proponents of the 2nd Amendment have countered that the right to keep and bear arms is a right of all citizens. The Court agreed in that respect, ruling that states and municipalities do not have the ability to completely ban the ownership of handguns. A the same time, they also declared that the 2nd Amendment is not without limits; that laws restricting felons or the mentally ill from owning firearms are still constitutional.
This ruling from the Supreme Court is significant in many respects. For one, it is the first time in U.S. history that the Supreme Court has addressed the 2nd Amendment. But far more important is the fact that this ruling was dissented by FOUR U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICES. If just one more had ruled against the security officer in this case, it could very well had led to the 2nd Amendment being declared irrelevant in modern society.
If anyone has any doubts as to whether or not they should vote, if anyone thinks they're going to just stay home in November and not vote for anyone in protest of either or both political parties, THINK AGAIN!! It is a function of the President of the United States to nominate successors to the Supreme Court, should a vacancy present itself during his/her term in office. It is the President who helps to shape the ideology of the Court through his nominees. With this in mind, we must also consider that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama has the most liberal voting record of anyone in Congress today, including Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton. If we, as a nation, elect Barack Obama to the presidency in November, we will also be allowing him the privilege and opportunity to shape the Supreme Court in a more liberal mindset. In history, a liberal Supreme Court is often a tool for creating new laws through the interpretation of the Constitution.
It is not now, nor was it ever, the intention of the founding fathers of this nation that the Supreme Court should create laws. It is the function of the Court to interpret the laws created by Congress and by the States relative to the Constitution. We must not allow a president into office who might see fit to use the Supreme Court in a way other than it was intended. Therefore, everyone who is eligible must register to vote, and in November, cast your vote.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
this year there is such a hard choice when deciding who to elect as our next President. I, and this is clearly my opion, think that if Barack Obama is elected then we are going to be in worse trouble than we are now. I fear that our national anthem will be changed to none other than "I Would Like To Teach The World To Sing".
As far as firearms go, I believe that we should have the choice to have protection against break-ins but as this post said there has to be limitations and specific rules because you can't trust every one with a gun.
So glad that you have joined me over in blogland!
It is a proven fact that in some European countries where firearms possession is not only not prohibited, but in fact REQUIRED, crimes in and around the home are greatly reduced or eliminated. Most believe that this is because would-be criminals clearly understand that if they break in to a house, they will most probably face someone holding a gun on them and they may very well end up leaving that house with a little tag tied to their toe identifying who they used to be before they ended up catching a terminal case of stupid.
That is how it should be here as well. To many times criminals break in a home and if the homeowner touches them they can sue and win the case. Personally a case like that where the criminal is victorious then somebody needs to be checking the judges mental state. We should not have to worry about playing nice to a criminal who has broke into our homes because it is just that OUR HOME, the operative word being OUR meaning we own it therefore we shouldn't be held back from protecting it. I do understand that not just everyone should be allowed to have a firearm because there are a lot of trigger happy people in the world today, especially in this country.
Don't forget, Monday morning I am doing a post about you and promoting your blog here to get some traffic moving through.
Talk to you later!
Love ya
Excellent post! Personally, I'm not thrilled with my Presidential candidate choices, but I've yet to miss an election. If we as citizens are ambivalent about this election, then we only have ourselves to blame once the race is over. I'll be back, so keep blogging!
Post a Comment