Sandy's Soapbox

July 2008

The Supreme Court …

     … sez the Second Amendment confers an individual right to bear arms.

     Who didn't know that?

     … sez some measure of governmental regulation does not infringe on this right, such as requiring background checks or creating lists of "prohibited persons" (e.g. convicted felons).

     Who didn't know that?

     What is likely to follow - who does know? Over the next "several" days, you are likely to hear "some" discussions and read "some" debates about the ramifications of this decision, parsing exactly what words the justices used and how they used them, in an attempt to see what existing laws are constitutional as well as to see which ones are ripe for a challenge, such as those which prohibit or restrict concealed carry, or those which describe what a "good" gun can look like ("black"/assault guns). For example, the decision speaks very clearly about the utility of a handgun for personal protection in the home (emphasis added) but not regarding concealed carry.

     While it's not entirely clear just how great the impact of this decision is likely to be, what is very clear is that we approached a very important, dramatic fork in the road, and the Court has led us down the right tine/path. Hallelujah!