Yes, we should be happy, but a 5-4 decision is way too close. One more liberal on that panel would condemn the Constitution. Speaking of which, the Kagan confirmation hearing begins today. Will Repubs do anything to stop that trainwreck? No.

Supreme Court rules that all Americans have fundamental right to bear arms

The Supreme Court ruled for the first time Monday that the Second Amendment provides all Americans a fundamental right to bear arms, a long-sought victory for gun rights advocates who have chafed at federal, state and local efforts to restrict gun ownership.

The court was considering a restrictive handgun law in Chicago and one of its suburbs that was similar to the District law that it ruled against in 2008. The 5 to 4 decision does not strike any other gun control measures currently in place, but it provides a legal basis for challenges across the country where gun owners think that government has been too restrictive.

“It is clear that the Framers . . . counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the conservatives on the court.

As I noted on Twitter, Snuffy is happy. Bastards are not. This will make my and Chris’ venture to a gun shop for our What Gun Should You Get? netcast even more fun and meaningful 🙂

Related Link:

NYT: Supreme Court Rules That Gun Rights Apply to Local Laws

Politico: Supreme Court ruling could prompt pro-gun lawsuits

This section is for comments from's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
16 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. DianeRoberts says:

    You’re right Tammy..waaaaay too close. And, if they EVER try getting my guns..I’d say to the enemies within..”bring it on.” 🙂

  2. trevy says:

    “This will make my and Chris’ venture to a gun shop for our What Gun Should You Get?”

    You have a good revolver. Now, you need a good shotgun. I have a Mossberg M500 Pursuader with a 6 round magazine.

  3. Laura says:

    It is highly disturbing that 4 would vote against this, only dictators like unarmed citizens

    Liberals, democrats, communists/marxists should not be allowed to live in America

  4. Maynard says:

    To be fair to the liberals, you must realize that this is a hugely complicated question. I mean, the statement “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” is open to many interpretations, and is certainly in no way inconsistent with the government seizing and banning arms. If you can’t see that, then you’re a simpleton that should shut up and listen to your Ivy League betters. They actually understand the subtle nuances of these issues. Only a conservative Neanderthal could be so sure that saying the people have the right to keep and bear arms means the people have the right to keep and bear arms.

    • RuBegonia says:

      Maynard, sentence one had me worried, sentence two gave me hope, sentence three set me free, sentence four completed the WOOFaw and sentence five…well, that’s just plain Maynard.

      • Maynard says:

        Ru, I have to laugh because I want to cry. Humans have a terrifying ability to rationalize whatever nonsense or malice appeals to them. Having a glimmer of realization that their position is doubtful, they take the next step and proclaim themselves the torch-bearers of the final TRVTH, standing brave and firm against an army of apostates. And it’s not like I’m immune to this inclination, but at least I’m aware of it. I know my ego and vanity and personal issues lead me astray. Sadly, it seems that thoughtful reason and humility tend to get shunted aside by passionate lunacy and outspoken evil. This is the tragic history of Man. What are we supposed to do about that?

    • thierry says:

      don’t be ridiculous, liberals merely think it was a typo. there was no spell check on those quill pens or delete button so editing got sloppy. the founders meant the right to arm bears, like, say , momma grizzlies…

  5. Southrider says:

    You ask – “What Gun Should You Get?”
    You need 3.
    A handgun to defend your life.
    A shotgun to defend your home.
    A rifle to defend your freedom.

  6. lord-ruler says:

    liberals are already saying it is hypocritical because conservatives are for states rights and to them this is a states rights issue. They forget that it is the constitutution that clearly say what the government can and can not do. Too bad for them we have a thing called “The bill of rights”

  7. Laura says:

    Check into a Serbu ‘super shorty’ shotgun 🙂

  8. trevy says:

    Auto Ordnance, still makes them in semiauto mode. I like Tommy’s too.

  9. jerocat says:

    What the four Justices of the Left are saying:

    Guns for the government,
    No guns for the governed.

    • thierry says:

      “If the opposition disarms, all is well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.” – stalin

      “Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?”-stalin

      “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.” hitler

      “All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.” Mao ( who went on to outright ban gun ownership and manufacture- china has the strictest gun ‘control’ laws in the world which is the main reason their brutal regime remains.)

      pol pot took the guns away from his countrymen starting in 1956. he is responsible for the slaughter of over 2 million cambodians- about 1/3 of the entire population.

      “Guns, for what?”- castro on being questioned about his implementation of strict gun controls.

      “The measures adopted to restore public order are: First of all, the elimination of the so-called subversive elements. … They were elements of disorder and subversion. On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results.” -mussolini

You must be logged in to post a comment.