Bench-Talk

Great news. 

"The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense in their homes, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. "

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_guns

"Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."

 What better place can you think of to have a loaded handgun?  Apparently critical thinking skills are an option for the justices rather than a steadfast requirement.

 

Ryan,

 That is great news, thanks for posting this news and attaching the "link"........However, as greatful as I am (as most firearm owners are) for this ruling/interpretation, I find it disturbing that the vote or "ruling" was as close as it turned out, meaning that 4 of our Justices did not feel the 2nd amendment says what I thought the words clearly stated "the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"......I guess to this "country boy" it sounded so simple.

Thanks Again Ryan

-H

While the for and against were all over the political spectrum, this illustrates why this Presidential election could be so pivotal. Those justices are getting long in the tooth and will retire one day. President Bush has his back against the wall with both houses being Democratically controlled and both whips being rather a long way from center of the road. Hooray for gun rights. It keeps the government from our door and let's not forget that was the very reason for having the 2nd Amendment.

 

Francis, 

 I totally agree...and all one has to do is look at the way the vote was divided between Justices and under which President thier appointment to the Supreme Court fell under to fully appreciate how "pivotal" this election could be and how important the past Justice appointments were to this case.... Now, plez splain sumpthin to me..... I am a "dumb ol country boy" and always thought that a "Supreme Court Ruling" was the "last word" but even now that we have "case law" to help interpret the 2nd,I understand that at a later date with different Justices "seated" it could be "ruled
another way?.....what would be considered the "final ruling"?...if there is such a thing? 

-H

 

 Plan for the worst, hope for the best.  Thanks for the link and posting Ryan!