Monday, July 7, 2008

Heller with a Gun*

*(My apologies to Louis L'Amour)

“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.”

So reads the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States. Every school age child that has advanced to, oh say, the second grade has been taught (or should have been taught but may not have been considering our “politically correct” society) these words. I cannot remember the first time I read them, but I’m sure it must have been in a school setting – it seems like I have always been familiar with them and the other rights expounded in the Constitution. What I cannot remember is ever having any confusion or misunderstanding about what they mean. The point is that any school child with a second grade education and even halfway decent reading skills can read these plain words and understand what they mean.

This doesn’t seem to be the case with those progressive members of our society and government (you know who they are, i.e. the ones that know so much better how you should live your life than you do). Mayor Adian Fenty and other “progressive” politicos in Washington, DC, recently took a case questioning the plain meaning of the Second Amendment to the Supreme Court of the United States.

As I understand them, the basics of the case are these:

Dick Heller is a “special police officer” who works in security at the Federal Judicial Center. His duties require him to carry a handgun while on duty. Because D.C. is such a violent, crime-laden city, Mr. Heller desired to keep his weapon at home to provide a means of defense for himself and his family. He applied for a license to do so, but because D.C.’s laws completely ban the possession of handguns and require long guns (rifles and shotguns) to be “unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device”, his application was denied. It is a crime in D.C. to even carry a gun from room to room in your own house.

I surely am not the only one that can see the irony and absolute hypocrisy of this situation. Mr. Heller is required to carry a handgun while on duty protecting government employees at the Judicial Center, but he is prohibited from even having a handgun or any other functional weapon that he can use to protect himself and his family in his own home. Likewise, Mayor Fenty and other “important” city and government officials have armed bodyguards to protect them, but the regular citizen cannot even protect himself.

Well, when the city denied Mr. Heller a license, he sued. The case ultimately was heard by the Supreme Court, and a decision was issued on June 26. By a 5-4 decision, the court determined that “[t]he Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.” Well, … duh! I mean, I am extremely thankful the court got it right. But, did we really have to have nine very expensive, black robed, juris doctorate, Supreme Court justices tell us this? As I indicated previously, I know several moderately intelligent second graders that could have read the plain language of the Second Amendment and told us this. And at significantly less expense!
The problem is there are too many “progressive” would be conspirators that would love to take away our Second Amendment rights. As long as we have the Second Amendment, our rights and freedoms are secure. If we ever lose the right to “keep and bear arms”, we will no longer be the “We the People”, the sovereign of our nation that are governed by our own consent. Rather we will be subjects, ruled by the whim and decree of the political elite. I pray this will never happen!

I do thank God that the Supreme Court got it right. But, I am concerned about a couple of things. First, it was a 5-4 decision. Just one vote the other way, and the Second Amendment would be history. That we have four supposedly very intelligent, experienced Supreme Court justices, who are sworn the uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, that would blatantly attempt to rewrite the Second Amendment out of the Constitution, in what I think is a direct violation of their oath of office, is extremely frightening to me. This just illustrates how very important it is that we elect good men to office that will appoint judges to the Supreme Court who will interpret the Constitution only in accord with what it says and means, rather than reinterpret the Constitution in accord with what they want it to say and mean.

Second, the Supreme Court did not go far enough. The Court left open the possibility that other laws that restrict our Second Amendment rights could be found constitutional. This could include gun licensing laws, gun registration, existing laws against concealed carry, laws restricting purchase and transport of firearms, etc. Each of these laws in some manner “infringe” upon my right and your right to “keep and bear arms”. To the extent they do, they are clearly unconstitutional no matter what the courts determine.

I do, however, agree with the Court regarding felons and the mentally incompetent being restricted from firearm possession. How can I agree with this considering that, it seems, some individuals’ Second Amendment rights are being infringed? Simple. By committing serious crimes (i.e. felonies) against the United States or its citizens (remember, we are the sovereign of our nation), a criminal (i.e. a felon) forfeits his rights as a citizen. This forfeiture can be total, i.e. as in capital punishment where the felon is deprived even of the right to life, or near total as in being imprisoned and isolated from society for an extended period of time. Very few rights are available to prisoners in such a situation. After a felon has served his time and is released, some of his basic Constitutional rights are restored, but not his Second Amendment rights. I feel this is a just response to serious crimes.

I have not agreed with several things President Bush has done, but I thank God that he was able to appoint Justices John Robert and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. I hope and pray our next president (please, not B. Hussein Obama!) will appoint good men of like character and convictions as Justices Robert and Alito to the Supreme Court. Because of them, Mr. Heller will have his gun!