A federal appeals court panel in Washington has marched blithely past a longstanding Supreme Court precedent, the language of the Constitution and the pressing needs of public safety to strike down Washington’s law barring residents from keeping handguns in their homes.
The ruling, approved 2 to 1 last week by the Federal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, was the first from a federal appeals court to hold a gun control law unconstitutional on Second Amendment grounds. It cries out for prompt reversal by the full circuit, and ultimate rejection by the Supreme Court.
The district’s strict gun-control law bars all handguns unless they were registered before 1976. The law was challenged by a guard at the Federal Judicial Center, who was permitted to carry a gun on duty and said he wanted to keep one at home.
The outcome turned on an interpretation of the Second Amendment, which says, “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 new decision jeopardizes sound legal precedent and the district’s law. It would imperil needed gun controls in place in jurisdictions around the country at a time when violent crime in many places is once again on the rise. It must be overturned.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/14/opinion/14wed2.html?ex=1331524800&en=658f79e92cf09bb2&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
The ruling, approved 2 to 1 last week by the Federal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, was the first from a federal appeals court to hold a gun control law unconstitutional on Second Amendment grounds. It cries out for prompt reversal by the full circuit, and ultimate rejection by the Supreme Court.
The district’s strict gun-control law bars all handguns unless they were registered before 1976. The law was challenged by a guard at the Federal Judicial Center, who was permitted to carry a gun on duty and said he wanted to keep one at home.
The outcome turned on an interpretation of the Second Amendment, which says, “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 new decision jeopardizes sound legal precedent and the district’s law. It would imperil needed gun controls in place in jurisdictions around the country at a time when violent crime in many places is once again on the rise. It must be overturned.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/14/opinion/14wed2.html?ex=1331524800&en=658f79e92cf09bb2&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
No comments:
Post a Comment