I know I'm late on this, but I just returned from a business trip to California. Great decision from Senior Judge Silberman on Friday, striking down --- by a vote of 2-1 --- the District's law banning possession of handguns in the home.
Of course, the usual suspects are decrying the decision. A fellow cigar aficionado pointed out to me today that Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, decried the decision because, after all, the law was thirty years old.
I suspect he would oppose such justification for continuation of Jim Crow/segregation laws (of more than eighty years' vintage) and laws enslaving Black Americans.
Unfortunately, Judge Silberman only alludes to -- rather than outright endorsing --- the principle purpose of the Second Amendment (pages 23-24 & n.9), which is, of course, to protect the people's right of revolution against oppressive government.
Of course, it is no coincidence that the most enthusiastic gun grabbers are also advocates for an ever-expending and more intrusive government (i.e., advocates for oppressive government).
No comments:
Post a Comment