The Right to Arm Bears and other things

[puppetmaker]

There was a bumper sticker that I saw as a teen that had a bear holding a gun and it said, "The Right to Arm Bears". That stuck with me. I grew up in the south where the right to own a gun for some was considered a birthright. Yesterday the Supreme Court in a rather interesting decision said that the individual has the right to keep and bear arms rather than, as many historians had conjectured, limited to state militias. The Supreme Court has now said what gun advocates have been saying for years that the amendment protects, "the inherent right of self-defense." Thus striking down a law in Washington DC for a zero tolerance on handguns within the city.

How much do I think this is going to change things? Not much at all. Most state laws are geared towards the individual right to own a firearm and have been for many years. It would have been much bigger if they had voted the other way.

The Supreme Court has been doing a lot of these kinds of cases this session. Bush can only appoint people to the court one more time before he is out of office. And we don't know who is going to take up the reigns of power after that. A number of issues that the court has side stepped until now are being taken head on. And interestingly most of the rulings have not been front page news. And these issues do affect us.

The interesting thing is that the court has not become Bush's stamp of approval that many were concerned that it was going to become. The court ruled that prisoners at Guantánamo Bay have a right to challenge their detentions in the federal courts which really put the administration panties in a twist. They have been very limiting in the powers of the administration in terms of war powers.

They have also been not hearing a lot of cases tossing them back to the court system from which these cases came. Sometimes deciding not to hear a case can be as important as hearing a case.

I am glad that the Supreme Court told MLB to stuff it where the sun don't shine when MLB tried to impose a licensing fee on all fantasy leagues. I thought this was absurd from the get go and made me respect MLB less then I did before. It was a stupid move to try to milk some more money from fans.

I am grateful that we have the Supreme Court in place even when I might not agree with the decisions. It's not a bad system.

Comments

[millysdaughter.livejournal.com]

I was happy with that ruling, but a few of their recent decisions have been rather...surprising. I am not quite sure how to think about a few of their latest rulings. Some of their "returned to lower court" cases really ought to have been heard, in my opinion. Because they will be back.

[walkertxkitty.livejournal.com]

This one was important for me. We've been teetering on the edge of 'zero tolerance' down here for some time because of the drug and arms trade.

But I actually do have need of the guns I own. We're a big county with a lot of unincorporated towns. That means that there isn't much in the way of city police (and even if they were, I'd still be dependent on the county for my law enforcement). We have one sheriff for the entire county and only fourteen deputies (the junior deputies do not count, as they are under age and cannot carry guns). We have one four wheel drive vehicle for a county that is largely sugar sand back roads.

You can probably already see where I'm going with this. Last year, someone came around the house at night when I was alone (this was before I finally caved and bought my revolver). My husband was away on business and the nearest neighbor is about a quarter mile down the road. No one should have been there. I called for help and it took them half an hour to get here. They hurried because they already knew they had two fugitives loose in the area, and it still took them that long. The deputy looked me right in the eye and said, "Ma'am, buy a gun. Next time, hold 'em until we get here because we can't respond fast enough."

I know people think that circumstances like this are either waning or don't exist, but that's not true. I've been in this county ten years and that's all the coverage we've had.

So I was extremely grateful to see the Supreme Court understanding that some of us do indeed need the right to own a gun.

[clauderainsrm.livejournal.com]

What I found surprising is that they took up the case in the first place instead of one from an actual *state*. Because the DC situation is rather unique and creates some doubt in how it's going to be interpreted... I've already heard some rumblings about how the decision might not end up affecting much in the long run, other than put some more legal challenges from both sides out there.

I'm surprised though that there isn't more talk about the Court's rejection of parts of McCain-Feingold that happened *the same day*. How often is it that a candidate for President has his main legislative effort struck down by the Supreme Court during an election season????