Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?


Second Amendment decision critics must be ‘confused’

The people who are voicing shock over the Bruen decision are either clueless were not paying attention. This was predictable and foreseeable, given the Supreme Court’s past decisions on gun rights.  The opinion by Thomas is well-reasoned.  He waited until the very end on page 62 to repeat a vital point –the 2ndAmendment is not a “second-class right.”

On CNN I watched legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin throw a hissy fit as if that was some insanely new and novel concept.  It’s not.  The Supreme Court announced that same principle verbatim in the McDonald case 12 years ago.  Toobin should take a course on reading comprehension and retention.

It’s also not true, as some are claiming (Toobin), that this means it’s a free for all and there are no rules or government regulations that may be imposed.  The high court has made it clear in three different cases that reasonable restrictions are permissible.  In the Heller decision, the court identified several such restrictions that were justified.

But the burden cannot be shifted to the gun owner to prove he’s of “good moral character” or has a “proper cause.”  That’s ridiculously vague and ambiguous.  It gives a government official unfettered discretion to reject a gun permit for any subjective reason. The presumption should always be in favor of the citizen who simply wants to defend him or herself.

The right to bear arms for self-defense is a primary right.  It’s enshrined in our cherished Bill of Rights. It is every bit as important and fundamental as the First Amendment rights.  And, as the court pointed out, that was the intent of the Founders who drafted the Second Amendment and the states that ratified it.