Gun Control:  Legitimate concerns
about Second Amendment issues

NJ Court Rules 2nd Amendment Does Not Apply in State.  New Jersey ratified the United States Constitution on December 18, 1787 — in fact, it was the third state to do so — but an appeals court has determined that that does not necessarily mean that the state must uphold the rights guaranteed by that Constitution. ... A New Jersey appeals court has concluded that Americans have no Second Amendment right to buy a handgun.  In a case decided last week, the superior court upheld a state law saying that nobody may possess "any handgun" without obtaining law enforcement approval and permission in advance.

From Guns to Butter.  Last week, the [Supreme] Court agreed to hear a Second Amendment challenge to Chicago's handgun ban.  Since that law is very similar to the Washington, D.C., ordinance that the Court declared unconstitutional last year, it is bound to be overturned, assuming the Court concludes that the Second Amendment applies not just to the federal government (which oversees the District of Columbia) but also to states and their subsidiaries.  That seems like a pretty safe assumption, since over the years the Court has said the 14th Amendment "incorporates" nearly all of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights.

Guns and the Constitution:  The phrase "the right of the people" or some variation of it appears repeatedly in the Bill of Rights, and nowhere does it actually mean "the right of the government."  When the Bill of Rights was written and adopted, the rights that mattered politically were of one sort — an individual's, or a minority's, right to be free from interference from the state.  Today, rights are most often thought of as an entitlement to receive something from the state, as opposed to a freedom from interference by the state.  The Second Amendment is, in our view, clearly a right of the latter sort.

Why the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is Important to You:  Across our nation a debate rages about "gun control".  This euphemism glosses over the fact that what is being debated is one of the most precious guarantors of liberty, the right to keep and bear arms.  At the heart of this debate is not whether the right to keep and bears arms is an individual right or not, but at its core the debate is over the primacy of the individual over the primacy of the government.  This debate rages because many, too many, in this country have forgotten, or, worse, have never been educated in, the nature of our rights.

Why Do We 'Keep and Bear Arms'?  The Founding Fathers assumed that any government, including the one they established, could grow into a monster.  They argued that only "the people" with a right "to keep and bear arms" could prevent such a tyranny.  James Madison, the "father of the Constitution," stated that tyrants were "afraid to trust the people with arms," and lauded "the advantage of being armed, which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation."

High-Profile Gun Rights Case Inches Toward Supreme Court.  The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is likely to decide whether the Second Amendment's guarantee of a right to "keep and bear arms" restricts only the federal government — the current state of affairs — or whether it can be used to strike down intrusive state and local laws too.

Sotomayor's 'Fundamental' Flaws.  Supporters of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor claim that her Second Amendment rulings are examples of "judicial restraint."  The problem is that she's restraining the Second Amendment.  Judge Sotomayor has ruled twice that the right to keep and bear arms is not a "fundamental right."  The second time was after the U.S. Supreme Court said that it is.

Sotomayor Ruled That States Do Not Have to Obey the Second Amendment.  Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor ruled in January 2009 that states do not have to obey the Second Amendment's commandment that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Chicago Law Banning Handguns in City Upheld by Court.  A Chicago ordinance banning handguns and automatic weapons within city limits was upheld by a U.S. Court of Appeals panel, which rejected a challenge by the National Rifle Association.  The unanimous three-judge panel ruled today that a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year, which recognized an individual right to bear arms under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, didn't apply to states and municipalities.

Ninth Circuit Court Extends Second Amendment Rights.  Believe it or not, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled today that the second amendment restricts the powers of state and local governments to interfere with the individual right to gun ownership.  The decison even observes that the right to bear arms is "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition."  Notes Cato Institute's Ilya Shapiro, "I rarely get a chance to say this, but the Ninth Circuit gets it exactly right."

Yes, California, There Is an Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms.  Today [4/20/2009] the Ninth Circuit (the federal appellate court covering most Western states) ruled that the Second Amendment restricts the power of state and local governments to interfere with individual right to have guns for personal use.  That is, the Fourteenth Amendment "incorporates" the Second Amendment against the states, as the Supreme Court has found it to do for most of the Bill of Rights.

Citizens can challenge state, local gun laws.  A federal appeals court ruled Monday that private citizens can challenge state and local gun laws by invoking the constitutional right to bear arms — the first such ruling in the nation — but upheld a ban on firearms at gun shows at the Alameda County Fairgrounds in Pleasanton.

Chicago Defies the Second Amendment.  Since the Supreme Court upheld the individual right to own guns last summer, one municipality after another with handgun bans has faced reality. Washington, D.C., which lost the case, changed its law.  Morton Grove, Ill., repealed its ban.  So did neighboring Wilmette.  Likewise for Evanston.  Last week, Winnetka followed suit.  Then there is Chicago ...

Right to Bear Arms:  Washington, D.C., will become a safer place to live and work thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Thursday [6/26/2008] against the city's absolute ban on handguns.  The Court ruled that the Second Amendment's guarantee of the right to bear arms is an individual right, not just one that permits states to maintain militias, striking down one of the nation's toughest anti-gun laws.  As someone who lived in the District at the time the city imposed its ban 32 years ago, I say it's about time.

The Court defers to plain language.  No sulking conservative can imagine the Second Amendment would have been upheld if Republican presidents had not appointed the five members of yesterday's majority.  Who can doubt that Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, John Kerry and ol' Bubba would have appointed judges dedicated to throwing out the constitutional guarantee upheld yesterday?

Silver Bullet.  The 2008 Supreme Court term ended with a bang yesterday as the Justices issued their most important ruling ever in upholding an individual right to bear arms.  The dismaying surprise is that the Second Amendment came within a single vote of becoming a dead Constitutional letter.

Bill to limit governor's control of guns OK'd by Senate panel.  On a 4-2 party-line vote, the Republican-controlled Senate Government Committee approved a measure Tuesday [6/20/2006] that would legally bar any [Arizona] governor from using a state of emergency to place new restrictions on the possession, transfer, sales, carrying, storage, display or use of firearms or ammunition.  The bill also would remove any ability to commandeer and use weapons or ammunition during any state of war.
It's a shame the states have to pass laws that reiterate the Second Amendment.
Constitution protects our right to bear arms.  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent affirmation of the "Right of the People" to bear arms was long overdue.  Our U. S. Constitution was written to guarantee that the civil rights we have would not be abridged by any government entity.  After the lessons learned from the tyrannical rule of the British and the resultant Revolutionary War, the last thing our forefathers wanted was a government that could remove our rights with the stroke of a pen.

Gun Ban Bill Would Cripple the Second Amendment, Group Warns.  Anti-gun Democrats are trying to make up for lost time by reintroducing legislation intended to ban so-called "assault" weapons, a Second Amendment group warns.  Gun Owners of America says the "queen of gun control," Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), is trying once again to outlaw many types of weapons based on their cosmetic features.

Gun Rights and Presidential Politics:  In the District of Columbia, it is a crime to have a handgun.  It also is a crime to have shotguns or rifles unless they are unloaded and disabled.  Ordinary people cannot have a gun, even in their own homes.  Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia struck down the law as unconstitutional.  The court said the Second Amendment does not allow a law like it because it keeps Americans living in D.C. from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

The Second Amendment Wedge.  Last week the Supreme Court decided to take on the biggest gun control case in almost seventy years:  District of Columbia v. Heller.  The Heller case is an appeal by the DC government from the US Circuit Court's decision holding unconstitutional D.C.'s ban on privately-owned handguns and severe limits on other weapons.

D.C.'s Gun Ban Gets Day in Court.  Despite mountains of scholarly research, enough books to fill a library shelf and decades of political battles about gun control, the Supreme Court will have an opportunity this week that is almost unique for a modern court when it examines whether the District's handgun ban violates the Second Amendment.  The nine justices, none of whom has ever ruled directly on the amendment's meaning, will consider a part of the Bill of Rights that has existed without a definitive interpretation for more than 200 years.

9 Seem Set To Rule for Gun Rights.  The U.S. Supreme Court appears ready to acknowledge for the first time that the Second Amendment bestows on Americans the right to possess guns.  While many gun owners have long believed such a right to exist under the Constitution, it has gone largely unrecognized by the federal courts.

Gun rights is biggest issue for court to decide.  The guns case — including Washington, D.C.'s ban on handguns — is widely expected to be a victory for supporters of gun rights.  Top officials of a national gun control organization said this week that they expect the handgun ban to be struck down, but they are hopeful other gun regulations will survive.

USA Today isn't too sure ...
Do you have a legal right to own a gun?  Guns, and questions about how much power the government has to keep people from owning them, are at the core of one of the most divisive topics in American politics.  Nowhere is that divide more pronounced than in the gap between Americans' beliefs about their rights under the Second Amendment, and how courts have interpreted the law.

Give gun owners uniformity.  Why does USA TODAY object to uniform laws?  The rules of safe driving don't change when you travel from a state highway onto a federal one.  Why should rules for gun owners change when they travel from a state park to a federal park or wildlife refuge?  As it is, gun owners who enjoy going afield in our parks face a confusing nationwide patchwork of rules and regulations, governed by different agencies and bureaucracies.  It's inconsistent, burdensome and unnecessary.  More than half the Senate agrees.

The DC Gun Ban:  Gun rights adhere to the American people, not to government-sanctioned groups.  Rights, by definition, are individual.  "Group rights" is an oxymoron.  Can anyone seriously contend that the Founders, who had just expelled their British rulers mostly by use of light arms, did not want the individual farmer, blacksmith, or merchant to be armed?  Those individuals would have been killed or imprisoned by the King's soldiers if they had relied on a federal armed force to protect them.

Isn't Self-Defense Common Sense?  [Scroll down] In last year's ruling, which the U.S. Supreme Court will soon review, the D.C. Circuit overturned a Washington, D.C., gun law that bans possession of handguns in the home and requires that rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock."  The law thereby effectively bars city residents from using firearms for self-defense in their own homes.  [Senator] Obama evidently considers that de facto prohibition a "common-sense regulation," since he recently cited Washington's law as an example of constitutionally permissible gun control.

The Armed Defense of Liberty:  Despite the heroic efforts of Sen. Bob Smith to turn it back, the latest batch of irrational and servile restrictions on the Second Amendment continues to ooze its way through that allegedly deliberative institution, the Congress.  Perhaps because the gun control debate is now so entirely drenched in the emotive sludge that is the principal intellectual food of our political establishment this seems a good moment to recall the deep reasons, the fundamental context, that must inform any responsible deliberations on the question of an armed citizenry.

Court Rediscovers 2nd Amendment, Liberals Fear Other 'Rights' May Soon be Found.  Tragedy struck leftists all across America last week when a federal appeals court reviewing the District of Columbia's handgun ban, ruled that the right of the people to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed upon by the District.

Second Amendment Solidified:  The Department of Justice issued an extensive report that very clearly and definitely shows that the Second Amendment was intended to protect an individual right. … The answer was definitive:  "The Second Amendment secures a right of individuals generally, not a right of states or a right restricted to persons serving in militias."

Ship captain's Second Amendment rights upheld.  A Warren County ship captain may carry a concealed weapon in New Jersey waters and ports, state Superior Court Judge John Pursel ruled Wednesday [8/11/2004].  The judge cited the post-Sept. 11 world of terrorist threats and the recent rise in the terrorist alert system not the Constitution] as part of the reason for his decision to grant the carrying permit.

The world according to Dick:  The Second Amendment Sisters simply advocate a woman's "right to choose" to own and carry firearms.  But [New Jersey Senate President] Dick Codey thinks the government should make that choice for them.  He knows what's best for a woman.

Supreme Court Refuses to Confirm Constitutional Right to Bear Arms :  The Supreme Court disappointed gun rights groups Monday [12/01/2003] by refusing to consider whether the Constitution guarantees people a personal right to own a gun.  The court has never said if the right to "keep and bear arms" applies to individuals.

Gunning for Your Gun Rights:  The United Nations' agenda may not be to overturn the Second Amendment per se, but it has cleared a path for making enforcement of this constitutional protection illegal under international law.

New Jersey to Expand Seizures in Gun Cases.  A New Jersey state assemblyman has introduced a bill that would allow the government to seize the home or car of anyone whose property contains an illegal firearm.  In New Jersey, nearly every gun is considered "illegal."

Gun Control:  The assault weapon statute is purely cosmetic — banning guns because of politically incorrect features such as bayonet lugs (as if drive-by bayoneting were a problem) or a rifle grip that protrudes "conspicuously" from the gun's stock.  Police statistics from around the nation show that such guns are rarely used in crime.

Guns and Federalism:  Members of Congress who support gun rights are currently engaged in a dubious tradeoff:  to save the Second Amendment, they've decided to undermine the Tenth.

Restoring the Right to Bear Arms:  For decades, the Second Amendment was consigned to constitutional exile, all but erased from constitutional law textbooks and effectively banished from the nation's courts.  But no more.  Recent developments in the law and in political culture have begun the process of returning the amendment to its proper place in our constitutional pantheon.

The Individual's Right to Bear Arms:  Judges know very well how to read the Constitution broadly when they are sympathetic to the right being asserted. We have held, without much ado, that "speech, or … the press" also means the Internet, and that "persons, houses, papers, and effects" also means public telephone booths.

Ninth "Circus" Court of Appeals Strikes Another Blow to Our Freedoms:  Federal court rules citizens do not have individual right to bear arms.

It's the anti-gun people who are nuts.  This year's Pittsburgh NRA convention set an attendance record.  Over the course of the convention's weekend-long run, more than 61,000 people visited the booths, workshops and meetings.  And, unlike at recent rallies in American cities "celebrating" sports teams' victories, there wasn't a single act of violence, not a single arrest, no wild drinking or drug-induced demonstrations. ... Come to think of it, I suppose that's precisely why the convention generated so little attention from the so-called mainstream media.

Gun Control:  The Criminal Lobby.  Gullible Americans are not rare.  All that is required for a small wealthy elite to destroy the Second Amendment is a gullible jury and a judge who permits a class action suit to expropriate the powers of legislators.

Reviving the Second Amendment:  On Oct. 16, [2001,] in United States v. Emerson, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit joined the Bush administration and respected legal scholars across the political spectrum in affirming the right that each of us enjoy, as individuals, to own a gun.

How Ted Kennedy Opposes The Second Amendment:  When the history of the 20th century is finally written, one of its key features will be the wanton slaughter of more than 170 million people, not in war, but by their own government.  The governments that led in this slaughter are the former USSR (65 million) and the Peoples Republic of China (35 to 40 million).  The point to remember is that these governments were the idols of America's leftists.  Part of reason for these and other tyrannical successes was because the people were first disarmed.

Blacks Allegedly Victimized By "Racist" Gun Control Laws:  Second Amendment experts say current gun control laws are preventing law abiding African Americans from acting in self-defense against the illegally armed criminals that infest their inner-city neighborhoods.

Maryland Police Say Disabled Man Has "No Good Reason" For Handgun:  The State of Maryland has denied a physically disabled citizen a permit to carry a concealed handgun because he does not have a "good and substantial reason" to be armed.

Where Gun Control Is Going:  It is astonishing that the American people continue to fail to get their collective intellectual arms around the absurdity and increasingly dangerous threat to human freedom that gun control represents.  Banned by the Second Amendment, restrictions placed upon government by the law of the land are blatantly ignored by that very same government!

DC Residents Sue to Keep Guns in Home:  Residents of the District of Columbia have lived with some of the nation's most restrictive gun-control laws since 1976.  Six of those residents, who claim their safety is at risk because they can't defend themselves, have sued the city to force a change in the law.

Sniper tips trigger firearms crackdown:  Gun advocates fear witch hunt by Montgomery County police… using the 100,000 tips called in during the October sniper terror investigation, reports the Washington Times.

D.C. Gun Law Under Fire:  A Second Amendment group is filing a lawsuit demanding that the nation's capital ease up its gun laws, which are considered the most restrictive in the nation.

Baltimore outlaws BB guns for minors:  The BB gun, like the classic Red Ryder celebrated in a popular holiday film, is a traditional Christmas gift that has always come wrapped in a certain risk.  Now the toy carries a threat that has nothing to do with putting an eye out:  a $500 fine and two months in jail.

Gun Control and Freedom:  Thomas Jefferson said, "When governments fear the people there is liberty.  When the people fear the government there is tyranny."

FBI Agents "Miffed" that Gun Owner Contacted Media:  Prior to the capture of "Beltway Sniper" suspects John Allen Muhammad and John Lee Malvo, an unconfirmed number of Maryland gun owners received surprise visits from the FBI as part of the investigation.  One such gun owner had a surprise of his own for the agents when they arrived at his home.

Why worry about a national gun database?  There's an obvious problem with arguing that an existing law is needed to prevent crimes like the sniper attacks when it has manifestly failed to do so.

NRA Sticker Is No Reason for Cops to Search Truck, Court Rules

Guns and Violence:  Did you know that water is 19 times more dangerous to a child than a firearm?  In 1996, 805 children died from accidental drownings and 42 died from firearm accidents.

Gun bans don't equal freedom:  A couple of the West's democracies are behaving less and less like the bastions of freedom they claim to be and more like authoritarian regimes rife with little Napoleons who want absolute control over their respective masses.

LaPierre:  9/11 Windfall for Anti-Gun Lobby:  The anti-gun lobby wants you to surrender your freedoms in the name of security.  If Americans fall for it, they will get neither, a new book warns.  "Smoke was curling over the ruins of the World Trade Center when the gun-control lobby swung into action, seizing on that tragedy to score points in the political arena," National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre and his predecessor James Jay Baker write in "Shooting Straight:  Telling the Truth About Guns in America."

The Second Amendment Revisited:  If the gun control lobby were really sincere about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, they would welcome the Bush administration policy, but there is no sincerity.  The hysterical reaction is all about not being able to ban the private ownership of guns.  Again and again their true intent becomes clearer: registration, gun bans, and finally confiscation.

The Second Amendment is Not Enough:  Pro-firearms advocates have been in a defensive posture for too long on this issue.  Rather than forever reacting to the threats by anti-gun advocates, pro-gun advocates should seek a legislative affirmation of the individual's right to bear arms.

The Second Amendment Strikes Back:  Enemies of the right to self defense using guns, must argue that "the people" in the Second Amendment does not refer to individuals, despite this interpretation everywhere else in the Bill of Rights when the Founding Fathers referred to "the people."

Ultimate Civil Right:  To Protect Yourselfby Charlton Heston

The Terrible Fear That People May Exercise Their Rights:  On April 10 [2002] an Ohio appellate court unanimously ruled that Ohio's ban on carrying concealed weapons, in effect since 1974, violated the people's right to keep and bear arms.  The appellate court also upheld a lower court's dismissal of the prosecution of a pizza deliveryman who carried a handgun in his waistband for protection while making his deliveries.  Since 1851, the Ohio Constitution has said, "the people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security."  In striking down the ban, the court noted that the framers of the Ohio constitution "put the citizens' rights up front.  We believe they meant what they said."  This ruling is a victory for the citizens of Ohio.

Making the case:  The lawlessness of today's racial quota and gun control liberals may be coming under serious challenge.

Mountaineer May Carry His Black Powder Rifle:  The Second Amendment Foundation has hired an airplane to fly a pro-gun banner over the crowd at Saturday's football game [9/7/2002] between the University of Wisconsin Badgers and the West Virginia Mountaineers.  "Guns save lives," the banner will read.

Does Bush's "Project Safe Neighborhoods" Violate the Constitution?  A Bush administration program that calls for federal agents to prosecute gun crimes runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution, some legal scholars believe.  "In actuality and despite what the federal courts have felt constrained to do, the federal government has no more legitimate constitutional authority over gun crime that happens in one state than it does over jaywalking or drunk driving," said Gene Healy, Cato Institute legal scholar.

More Injustice on the Way:  Gene Healy, a Cato Institute scholar, recently provided a thorough exploration of the unintended consequences of the new Bush-Ashcroft plan to federalize gun crimes, known as the Project Safe Neighborhoods program.  The unintended consequences of this law are frightening.

Heston on the right to bear arms:  In an exclusive interview, the NRA chief sounds off on threats to the 2nd Amendment.

Bush Administration Backs Individual Right to Bear Arms:  Reversing the four-decade-long federal interpretation of the Second Amendment, the Bush administration has told the Supreme Court that it believes the Constitution protects an individual's right to bear arms.

Are Gun Control Opponents Crazy?  Reflect on this:  Hitler was popularly elected.  We know what happened in Germany.  Among his first actions was to impose restrictions on gun ownership "For the safety of the people of Germany."  Is this the kind of safety Bill Clinton has in mind for us?  The primary goal of the Second Amendment, and the reason that it is indispensable, is to give each American the ability to protect himself from a repressive Government and the ability to defend himself where the State never can — in his home.

"Safety" is not even worthy of our consideration as an issue.  When it comes to your Second Amendment rights, the issue of freedom is more important than the issue of safety.

Gun rights decision may sound the death knell for gun bans:  The media has largely ignored a recent Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual the right to bear arms.

Gun Group Says Second Amendment Foe Exploiting Tragedy:  A gun rights group says an anti-gun congressman is using the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States as an excuse to further his unconstitutional agenda.

Reading the Second Amendment:  Is [the Second Amendment] so hard to understand?  Apparently so.  Even some of its defenders don't like how it is worded because it allegedly breeds misunderstanding.  But the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights is indeed a well-crafted sentence.  By that I mean that its syntax permits only one reasonable interpretation of the authors' meaning, namely, that the people's individual right to be armed ought to be respected and that the resulting armed populace will be secure against tyranny, invasion, and crime.  Someone completely ignorant of the eighteenth-century American political debates but familiar with the English language should be able to make out the meaning easily.

A Freedom Under Fire:  Except for perhaps the question of whether or not to legalize abortion, no public issue of recent years has absorbed more interest or stirred the violent emotions of thoughtful people (and of those less so) than the prickly matter of gun control.  In the editorial pages of newspapers, before the committees of Congress, the battle has been joined.

Weapons Scanner Raises Constitutional Concern:  A federal agency is developing a radar-like device that uses electromagnetic waves to peer through clothing and detect concealed weapons from up to 50 feet away.  News of the planned system comes amid national angst over domestic terrorism while adding a new dimension to the debate over the constitutionality of high-tech policing practices.

No individual gun rights?  Quotations from the Founding Fathers on the subject of the Second Amendment

The Strange Case of United States v. Miller:  With the extreme polarization of the modern gun debate, this case has assumed an importance far beyond what anyone expected in 1938.

Dianne Feinsteins' Latest Incredible Lie.

Militia 101.

The U.S. v. Miller Revisited.

United States vs Miller : Court opinion & documents.

Who Will Speak for the Second Amendment?:  A new Web site has appeared which accuses Attorney General John Ashcroft of having expressed "a position on the Second Amendment that is in direct conflict with legal precedent, historical research, and established Justice Department policy."  What exactly did Ashcroft say?  The site quotes a May 17, 2001 letter to National Rifle Association Executive Director James Jay Baker, in which Ashcroft writes:  "…let me state unequivocally my view that the text and the original intent of the Second Amendment clearly protect the right of individuals to keep and bear firearms."  That is the statement which the Violence Policy Center (VPC) condemns.

Guns, Personal Security, and Freedom  By Richard Burgner.

Firearms and Freedom The Second Amendment protects what is arguably the most important liberty of all, since it safeguards all other rights.

Liberty Belles:  Putting your Second Amendment rights first.

Back to the Gun Control Page
Back to the Home page

Bookmark and Share

Custom counter developed in-house

Document location http://www.akdart.com/gun2.html
Updated November 3, 2009.

Page design by Andrew K. Dart  ©2009