Roberts Court Shows Common Sense

Recently the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Roberts finally made clear the high courts opinion on the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution and key component of the Bill of Rights. In a 5 to 4 decision with Justice Kennedy as the tie breaker, the high court did as some predicted. The high court ruled that the DC gun ban was in fact a violation of Mr. Heller's Constitutional rights. The high court in its decision, also stated that the 2nd Amendment was in fact an individual right.

Many opponents of this decision have already started the cry that "people will no longer be safe" and other such similar statements. I simply can't agree with this view, especially since Washington DC has consistently had one of the nations highest murder rates and in some years leading in murders. When will people realize that when you remove guns from law abiding citizens you simply create a "target/victim rich environment" for malcontents and others who do not respect the rule of law. Some people are under the ridiculous and false belief that when you outlaw firearms, criminals turn in their guns and cease all activity to acquire new ones just like the law abiding members of society. History has shown that criminals do not turn in guns when others are asked to and certainly don't cease attempting to acquire new and or additional guns. Gun free zones which many anti-gun enthusiasts view as Utopia are nothing more than Disney to criminals. I challenge anyone to show me even one example of a society where guns were taken from the lawful populace and the result was not either a tyrannical government or an increase in crime against those no longer able to defend themselves.

It never ceases to amaze me that so many people wish to continue to question what the 2nd Amendment meant even though it was the shortest and most concise of all the amendments. Some will say that the framers never intended for the general public to own or have access to arms, which is highly questionable considering the framers based it on the concept of preventing a tyrannical government. I grow very tired of people telling us that "art" depicting excrement on Jesus is protected by the 1st Amendment, yet virtually anything short of a disassembled single barrel shotgun (unloaded and trigger locked of course) is questionable and not what the framers wanted. I may not agree with certain "displays" such as the previously referenced example, but it, like guns are, has been, and will continue to remain protected under the US Constitution. The only way that this can be changed is for our legislative branch to attempt a new Constitutional Amendment which requires at minimum 3/4 of all members to be in agreement.

This decision by the high court, although heavily favored by, is not a victory for the Republican Party, the NRA, or even Mr. Heller who first started this case rolling. This decision is a victory for the Constitution itself, for the high court did as it is charged and confirmed the meaning and wording that was put to ink all those years ago.

The US Constitution and all contained therin are the law of the land which is the basis of our society and basis of our rule of law.