I trying to follow the new judge on the Supreme Court, which also means following the cases that are up for legislation. Amongst the fascinating (Really, I’m serious! They are!) cases is the robustness of the second amendment:
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.
The robustness of the amendment is called into question because the city of Chicago wants to ban handguns…which I consider an awesome move. This is unconstitutional under the current interpretation of the second amendment.
The robustness of the law, I’m glad, was called into question by one of the judges who said, “We certainly don’t want guns in the courtroom.” which was followed by a flutter of laughter in the crowd.
The people have the right to keep and bear arms, but this is not an absolute right to bear any arms anywhere under any circumstances:
- You do not have the right to bear arms in a courtroom.
- You do not have the right to bear pipe bombs.
- You do not have the right to bear unregistered arms.
Just to name a few. The second amendment is not an absolute mandate and must be interpreted by the supreme court. It’s clear that it is not unconstitutional to ban certain types of arms in certain places and circumstances. The question is what arms are protected by the second amendment and under what circumstances.
The second amendment was written in the time of muskets. Sure, I’ll support your right to bear muskets. Have you ever tried to load a musket? It’s pretty time-consuming, which is why you have a bayonet at the end. If you miss, you may have to chase them rather than reload. Bayonets would be in the category of Weapons of Minimal Destruction. If I thought that my neighbor was stockpiling muskets, I probably wouldn’t be too worried.
Today’s weaponry is a different story. With the amount of damage that my neighbor can do with a couple of semi-automatic weapons or some nitroglycerin or even a dirty pipe-bomb, I’m leaning towards giving up our right to bear arms…especially with the terrifying amount of instruction that is given on the internet.
So the Supreme Court hasn’t asked my opinion yet, but when they do I will tell them that the second amendment should protect citizen’s right to bear arms that had been invented by 1791.
My interpretation of the second amendment protects your right to bear the following weapons:
- Brown Bess
- Nock Gun
These are all the weapons that I believe that the second amendment should protect. If a city or state wants to add to this list to including hunting weapons, pipe bombs, or nuclear bombs, that is their right; but if a city or state wants to ban any weaponry not on this list, that is also their right.
John Roberts, I’m waiting for your call.