CmdrFenix.org

The Supreme Court has brought down a descision in the case of McDonald vs Chicago. This case was an appeal that affirmed the right of Chicago to ban handguns in the city for self defense. The constitutional question to come out of this was, does the 14th amendment which made most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states included the second amendment.

U. S. 145, 149, or, as the Court has said in a related context, whether it is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,” Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U. S. 702, 721. Heller points unmistakably to the answer. Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present, and the Heller Court held that individual self-defense is “the central component” of the SecondAmendment right. 554 U. S., at ___, ___. Explaining that “the needfor defense of self, family, and property is most acute” in the home, ibid., the Court found that this right applies to handguns because they are “the most preferred firearm in the nation to ‘keep’ and use for protection of one’s home and family,” id., at ___, ___–___. It thus concluded that citizens must be permitted “to use [handguns] for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.” Id., at ___. Heller also clarifies that this right is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and traditions,” Glucksberg, supra, at 721. Heller explored the right’s origins in English law and noted the esteem with which the right was regarded during the colonial era and at the time of the ratification ofthe Bill of Rights. This is powerful evidence that the right was regarded as fundamental in the sense relevant here. That understanding persisted in the years immediately following the Bill of Rights’ratification and is confirmed by the state constitutions of that era,which protected the right to keep and bear arms.

This pretty much sums it all up. Something we all knew already. As to be expected, the liberal members of the SCOTUS all dissented on this saying the second amendment didn’t apply to states as the fourteenth amendment only contained a watered down filling of the bill of rights. Thankfully the rest shot down that opinion and now the court has spoken.

Of course, Mayor Daley in Chicago is busy with contingency plans and has said he’s ready to respond if they overturn this ban. I fully expect him to do the same BS that D.C. did in the wake of Heller. Make it so impossible to obtain the permits to get a gun, that you effectively ban them anyhow. I guess we’ll just have to see what happens.