Image found at Technicolor Dreams
The recent US Supreme Court decision on extending 2nd Amendment rights to all cities and states, effectively removing most, if not all, local gun rights, gave me pause.
While I’m not a gun owner [Super Soakers don’t count, do they?], I do support the right to own a gun [no semi-automatic or assault rifles, AK-47’s and the like] and to use it for personal protection, harmless target practice or hunting. Even properly registered guns with a concealed weapon permit are ok by me, as long as the person packing heat has been trained and knows how to use the gun and plans to be responsible in their use.
I discussed this recent decision with a local gun rights supporter, who also happens to feel that state rights should not be trumped by federal rights. Yet, he supports this decision. I asked him about his conundrum and conflict:
- ME: “So you don’t want the feds to take away states rights, yet you support this decision?”
- ME: Asking a follow-up question, “So it’s ok when it’s something you agree with, but yet when the Supreme Court decides on something you don’t agree with, it’s not ok?”
- HIM: “Well, yes… er.. um.. I guess”
We didn’t discuss much after that, changing the subject to something generic [“Are you getting the new iPhone 4?”], but it made me think about this. Sure, there are some decisions that the court decides that I don’t agree with [the decision earlier this year, removing the limitation of corporations to financially participate in elections], but I really do try to keep an open mind about how some of these decisions are made, for the most part, trying to see how they would benefit others. The ultimate goal of the Supreme Court is to extend rights, not take them away. I’m waiting to see what the impact of this 2nd amendment decision will be before I weigh in with my thoughts, but would like to hear how others feel about this.
Comment away below.
Copyright © 2010 - All Rights Reserved