Banning America's Rifle

 I found the essay entitled Banning America's Rifle: An Assault on the Second Amendment by Stephen P. Halbrook at the Federalist Society to be a valuable history of the attempt by anti-gun forces to disarm the citizens of the United States. It is a long piece, so allow time to read the whole thing. Halbrook delves into the various Federal and Supreme court rulings tracing the what Justice Thomas has described as a second class right in today's telling. But at an earlier time in our history, it was, as Joseph Story described it, the palladium of liberties. And it is important to remember that the Second Amendment does not stand in a vacuum. Its purpose is to support the other 9 Amendments, which together define the rights of an American.

In a broader sense, it is important that courts not spray-fire from the hip in denigrating or belittling unpopular constitutional rights. To have a checklist of excuses to uphold every restriction that comes down the pike is to disrespect the Constitution. Going down that path on the Second Amendment creates an atmosphere in which other constitutional liberties are endangered.

All of that said, decisions upholding bans must be put in context. That only six states ban certain long guns and handguns as assault weapons, and that 44 states do not, reflects a national, popular consensus that such bans violate the Second Amendment and are ineffectual. Judges from the mainstream states have had no occasion to opine on the issue because no such bans exist in those states. Instead, many of these states have a long tradition of judicial recognition of Second Amendment rights. The absence of prohibitions and correspondingly of judicial decisions across the heartland is a silence that is deafening.

As I have said repeatedly, the government that trusts you and me with guns is more to be trusted. But those that do not can not be trusted with anything.