Tapsearch Com EditorNew piece up at The American Spectator
March 13th 2007 12:59
The Spectator has my new piece on the Parker dissent.
Main point:
"Last Friday's Parker v. District of Columbia ruling ruling (pdf) was an incredible triumph for gun rights. The federal D.C. court of appeals ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, striking down the District's laws (A) mandating all guns be stored locked and unloaded and (B) effectively banning handguns. The Supreme Court will likely hear the case.
"Anti-gunners, not surprisingly, weren't happy. The Washington Post stated that 1939's U.S. v. Miller settled the issue: The Second Amendment protects the states' right to have militias, not the people's right to have guns.
"This interpretation is incorrect, as even the dissenting opinion in Parker -- which the Post credited for having 'rightly lambasted' the majority -- demonstrates."
Main point:
"Last Friday's Parker v. District of Columbia ruling ruling (pdf) was an incredible triumph for gun rights. The federal D.C. court of appeals ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, striking down the District's laws (A) mandating all guns be stored locked and unloaded and (B) effectively banning handguns. The Supreme Court will likely hear the case.
"Anti-gunners, not surprisingly, weren't happy. The Washington Post stated that 1939's U.S. v. Miller settled the issue: The Second Amendment protects the states' right to have militias, not the people's right to have guns.
"This interpretation is incorrect, as even the dissenting opinion in Parker -- which the Post credited for having 'rightly lambasted' the majority -- demonstrates."
| 44 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
