From the Los Angeles Times
The gun-rights fight isn't over
Self-defense is upheld, but control advocates
aren't done by a long shot.
By Brian Doherty
June 27, 2008
The Supreme Court's decision in the District of Columbia vs. Heller
case settles a long, heated debate, finding the 2nd Amendment protects
an individual right to own weapons for self-defense -- not merely a
right related to membership in a "well-regulated militia."
But the ruling doesn't end the struggle over gun control, nor does it
mean gun regulations have been eliminated. The court lists a number of
laws the decision does not affect, including concealed-weapon
prohibitions and "long-standing prohibitions on the possession of
firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the
carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government
buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the
commercial sale of arms."
Still, even though the decision didn't ban gun control outright, it did
make a strong statement about our right to self-defense and safety.
The city of Washington claimed its gun ban helped protect citizens. But
the facts show how foolish it is to rely on gun control for safety.
Washington's per-capita murder rate has exceeded the rate in 1976 (when
the ban passed) every year but one since then. For 10 of the last 30
years, its murder rate was more than twice as high as in '76. The
ugliest aspect of D.C.'s law was its implication that your life is not
worth protecting -- given that police cannot, and don't promise to,
protect you in every life-threatening situation.
Like other epochal Supreme Court decisions, Heller will give rise to a
protracted legal and public-policy debate.
Leading gun-control advocates, such as the Brady Center, are already
spinning Heller as a victory: They claim the gun-rights lobby's
strength is based on stoking the public's slippery-slope fears that any
gun regulation is a forerunner to a total ban. With that ban now
impossible, gun-control advocates believe they'll have more ability to
restrict sales, possession and carrying in ways short of prohibition.
Gun-rights advocates, for their part, are expected to use this decision
to challenge Chicago's handgun ban next, attacking another important
question: Does the 2nd Amendment apply to state and local or only
federal laws?
The right at issue -- an ancient right, preserved but not created by
the 2nd Amendment -- is that of self-defense. The gun-control debate
will continue, but it is a blessing that the court has refused to deny
us the means of protecting our homes and families.
Brian Doherty is a senior editor at Reason magazine and the author of
the forthcoming book, "Gun Control on Trial."
Copyright 2008 Los Angeles Times