THE DAILY BLADE: Supreme Court To Rule On Whether We Have The Right To Bear Arms
The Supreme Court has granted cert. in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, which challenges the constitutionality of Washington, D.C.
Legal scholars, historians and grammarians have incessantly parsed the wording and punctuation of the Second Amendment ("A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"), and now the high court will decide whether the right is granted to individuals or collectively to the state. Reports Legal Times:
Both sides in the dispute - the D.C government, and Dick Heller, a D.C. resident who challenged it - had asked the high court to decide the constitutionality of the statute. But significantly, the justices wrote their own version of the "question presented" that will frame and focus the briefing in the case.
Here is the question the justices want answered: "Whether the following provisions - D.C. Code secs. 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02 - violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?"
D.C. Code sec. 7-2502.02(a)(4) bans registration of handguns after a cut-off date of September 24, 1976, except by retired D.C. police officers; 22-4504(a) makes it illegal to carry an unlicensed pistol (even room-to-room inside a home); and 7-2507.02 requires that a gun kept in the home be completely disabled.
The Washington Post notes that Robert Levy, a scholar with libertarian think tank Cato Institute, and co-counsel Clark M. Neily III and Alan Gura “worked for years to assemble a challenge to the D.C. ban that the courts would accept. Their plaintiffs are law-abiding citizens who want the weapons for self-defense rather than people appealing criminal convictions for possessing weapons.”
The case, expected to be argued in March 2008 and decided by June, is the high court’s first examination of the Second Amendment since 1939, when it issued a narrow ruling in U.S. v. Miller (a bootlegger who challenged his conviction for transporting a sawed-off shotgun across state lines) that the amendment pertained to state militias, not individuals. That interpretation has been upheld by courts of appeal nationwide, except for the D.C. Circuit and the 5th Circuit.
In an editorial last week urging the Supreme Court to “take the gun case” the WaPo issued its own ruling:
[T]he District's gun ban need not be invalidated even if the justices find an individual right in the Second Amendment. All rights - from free speech to the right to assemble - are subject to limits and regulation. So, too, should a right to bear arms.
Um, what about that part at the very end where the Founding Fathers state that the right “shall not be infringed”? That the Court’s question is framed in the context of violating the rights of individuals is an important indication of its leanings.
Editorial Note: On a somewhat related topic, The Oread Daily* blog comments on the ridiculousness of posting signs designating a specific area a “Gun Free” and/or “Drug Free” zone (second item): “I mean really folks, can you picture someone heading out to commit a gun crime seeing such a sign and deciding to take their gun home and look for something else to do.” The post is worth reading for its own sake, and as a reminder that not all liberals want to take away the people’s right to bear arms.
The Other Shoe Drops: Updates To Previous Posts
† Illegal Immigration Discombobulates Environmentalists: Part II (second item): The New York Times reports that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is ahead of schedule in building the 700-mile 12-to-15-foot-tall steel fence along the Mexican border, but Defenders of Wildlife and other environmental advocacy groups are challenging DHS chief Michael Chertoff’s authority to issue waivers to forego environmental impact studies. DHS maintains that the design and construction of the fence allows migration of lizards and other animals, resolving one of the issues raised by environmentalists.
† Somebody Up There Doesn’t Like Embryonic Stem Cell Research: In yet another setback for those who would kill embryos in the name of science, two separate studies – one conducted by researchers in Japan, the other here in the U.S. – report that it is possible to “reprogram” adult skin cells to revert back to an embryonic stem cell state. Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University, whose research is published in the peer-reviewed journal Cell, had previously used the technique successfully with mouse cells.
James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin, whose work is published in the peer-reviewed journal Science, tells The Associated Press: "People didn't know it would be this easy. Thousands of labs in the
What is proving harder is for those who are emotionally or politically invested in embryonic stem cell sources to admit that they are prone to becoming tumors rather than useful tissues, as The Renaissance Biologist* blog points out.
† Multiculturalism Vs. Animal Rights (second item): The New York Times reports that immigrants from West Africa have created a demand for bushmeat – African wild game, such as baboon, green monkey, lion and warthog. One purveyor, Mamie Manneh, 39, of Staten Island, NY, is in trouble with the law for falsely labeling the meat and not obtaining the necessary permits:
Her lawyer has made a motion to dismiss the indictment, arguing that bushmeat has spiritual significance and Ms. Manneh’s actions were protected under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The case has attracted attention from an array of interested parties. Wildlife conservationists see trade in bushmeat as a grave threat to dwindling species; epidemiologists view it as a dangerous vector of disease. …
Epidemiologists have shown that ebola can be contracted by butchering chimpanzees, and the first human case of H.I.V. probably originated through similar exposure, said Nathan Wolfe, a professor of epidemiology at the University of California in Los Angeles.. The growth in global demand for wild game, he said, increases the potential for spreading agents “that could represent serious threats to humanity,” he said. …
Ms.Manneh’s lawyer, Jan Rostal of Federal Defenders of New York … [argues] that the meat provides “spiritual sustenance” similar to the bitter herbs served at a Passover Seder.
It wasn’t just the endangered species angle of the story that caught The Stiletto’s attention. Manneh, who immigrated from Liberia at the age of 16, claims that she cannot read or write; is currently serving a two-year sentence for second-degree assault for hitting a woman who she said was her husband’s girlfriend with a vehicle; and was diagnosed with schizo-affective disorder in 2006. When she wasn’t selling butchered carcasses of endangered species she worked as a home health aide. Imagine, she can’t read or write and she was hired by some unscrupulous agency to administer medication, and possibly injections, to ailing and aged people.
*Disclosure: OD and The Renaissance Biologist have posted items from The Stiletto Blog, and The Stiletto often exchanges friendly correspondence on topics of mutual interest with the publishers of both blogs.
I appreciate my right wing friend (from NYC of all places) for referring y'all to the OD (which/who by the way is located in America's heartland) from time to time even though she refers to me in the above article as a liberal. For the record, the Oread Daily is far to the left of liberal (I'm sure The Stiletto readers can think of better things to call me). The Oread Daily is, as she point, out against gun control. For a slightly more detailed explanation check out the OD article "LEFT WING WACKOS FOR GUNS" at http://oreaddaily.blogspot.com/search?q="only+cops+will+have+guns" or "DON'T TAKE THE SHOTGUNS AWAY" at http://oreaddaily.blogspot.com/search?q="don't+take+the+shotguns+away"
I think if you read more of the OD you'll find that while you disagree with most of what it has to say, you'll discover it takes some positions you'll find surprising, and tries as well to cover information and stories which relate to average Americans on a regular basis...
Reply to this
For some reason the above links don't seem to take you to the articles. So if you do really want to read them, just go to the blog and type the title in the search...
Reply to this