enthalpy

Saturday, December 09, 2006


Interesting test case for handgun bans in D.C.
In a case that could shape firearms laws nationwide, attorneys for the District of Columbia argued Thursday that the Second Amendment right to bear arms only applies only to militias, not individuals.

The city defended as constitutional its long-standing ban on handguns, a law that some gun opponents have advocated elsewhere. Civil liberties groups and pro-gun organizations say the ban is unconstitutional.

At issue in the case before a federal appeals court is whether the Second Amendment right to "keep and bear arms" applies to all people or only to "a well regulated militia." The Bush administration has endorsed individual gun-ownership rights but the Supreme Court has never settled the issue.
I thought this case was settled in 1939 with U.S. v. Miller when the court said the Second doesn't apply to individual rights, but rather the collective of a militia. What none of this argument addresses is what is meant by "militia." If only militias can bear arms, who's to say what is or isn't a militia? Anyone advocating militias are limited to the National Guard haven't been to any of my family reunions.



Home