Safe Mode: On
US Supreme Court: Citizens must be permitted to use handguns for self-defense

US Supreme Court: Citizens must be permitted to use handguns for self-defense: Treaties Do Not Supercede The Second Amendment!



In June of 2010, when the Supreme Court ruled in McDonald v. Chicago that the Second Amendment is “fully applicable to states,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote a majority opinion that provides a rare and educational glimpse into the historical meaning of the right to keep and bear arms.



Almost every American knows they have “the right to keep and bear arms,” although a majority may not be able to quote the Second Amendment verbatim. Thus, many don’t understand that the right to keep and bear arms is not just another right Americans possess, but a right which is actually the lynchpin holding all the other natural rights in their proper place (i.e., once the right to keep and bear arms is infringed, recognition of all other rights will depend only on the benevolence of the state).



In his opinion Justice Alito points back to the Heller decision (2008) to highlight the fact the “the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense.” He also highlights how the right to keep and bear arms has long been viewed as one of the “fundamental rights necessary to our system of orderly liberty.” In just these two snippets from his decision we see that we have guns not primarily for the purpose of plinking or hunting or shooting sporting clays, but for defending our lives. Moreover, we learn that the private ownership of guns in this country is “necessary” to the system of liberty we enjoy: or to put it as the Founding Fathers did, the right to keep and bear arms is “necessary to the security of a free State.”



Justice Alito also focused on the Heller decision to add a third and crucial point for Americans living in the 21st century: “[Since] ‘the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute’ in the home … we found that this right applies to handguns because they are ‘the most preferred firearm in the nation to “keep” and use for protection of one’s home and family.’” Yes, you read that correctly: Justice Alito reminded us that the Supreme Court not only held that we keep and bear arms for self-defense but that a handgun is the most preferred firearm for exercising that right. “Thus,” added Justice Alito, “citizens must be permitted ‘to use [handguns] for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.’”



Justice Alito bolsters these points by providing readers of the court’s opinion with a great quote from 19th-century U.S. Senator Samuel Pomeroy:
Every man … should have the right to bear arms for the defense of himself and family and his homestead. And if the cabin door of the freedman is broken open and the intruder enters for … purposes [that are] vile, then should a well-loaded musket be in the hand of the occupant to send the polluted wretch to another world, where his wretchedness will forever remain complete.



As you see, even this cursory glance at Justice Alito’s words reminds us that the Second Amendment hedges in our right to self defense, that it is necessary to liberty and that the Supreme Court recognizes handguns as the weapon of choice for exercising this right.




http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/05/07/us-supreme-court-citizens-must-be-permitted-to-use-handguns-for-self-defense-treaties-do-not-supercede-the-second-amendment/


Added: May-14-2012 Occurred On: May-14-2012
By: dontknowzed
In:
Other News
Tags: Supreme, court, gun, control, handgun
Location: United States (load item map)
Views: 1681 | Comments: 32 | Votes: 2 | Favorites: 1 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • I believe every household in America should own at least one handgun.

    Posted May-14-2012 By 

    (10) | Report

    • @justsid
      Everyone should have the right to buy a hand gun
      well,
      except those with violent crimninal records,
      they need to have targets on their fore heads


      jmo

      Posted May-14-2012 By 

      (3) | Report

    • @justsid Canada too. Every Indian has 11 rifles, so they get stolen every 15 minutes and used by degenerates. Majority of people are good and decent and given the proper training, would deter a shitload of crimes.

      Posted May-14-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • @justsid I believe every household in America should own more than one handgun!

      Posted May-14-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • Comment of user 'Alpha1' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • Ooooh, and the liberals continue to whine and cry and scream about how the Constitution interferes with their agenda.

    Posted May-14-2012 By 

    (10) | Report

    • @ST0N3PONY
      They need to 'fix' the supremes with a few more choice appointments....

      jusayn,
      they will never give up until those that oppose them are powerless to stop them

      Posted May-14-2012 By 

      (6) | Report

  • i could not agree any harder than i am right now.

    Posted May-14-2012 By 

    (6) | Report

  • our government needs to go a step further and provide all law abiding citizens with a government issue handgun

    Posted May-14-2012 By 

    (4) | Report

  • Why not also mention the point that citizens ought to be armed in order to protect themselves and each other from government tyranny! Those pigs who beat a man to death over a few letters should have been shot before they could finish their evil business. They should NOT feel safe to do what they did. People ought to step in armed with guns instead of cellphone cameras. Sure, documentary evidence is also a powerful tool in fighting government evil, and necessary too. But to stop the evil directl More..

    Posted May-15-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • Cry Leftards!!! Cry Socialists!!! Cry you little bitches, because common sense and rational answer to an unrational act has won again!!!

    Posted May-15-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • That's why I own weapons and carry a weapon. My collection is top notch.

    Posted May-14-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • esauistheend says: that's because they can't fight


    I say: You couldn't fight your way out of a paper bag, racist!

    Posted May-14-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • People in government may be "permitted" to represent our constitutional rights or GTFO!

    Posted May-15-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • they have already stretched their power by making you need a permit to do so,the constitution already gave you that permit,duh,and how much of the taxpayers money was spent on this ruling?
    but prepare for their next trick,if they can't get control of ours arms,or just plain take them away,they are going after the ammunition,nothing in the constitution about that is there? lol ,worst part is everyone of these so called "elected" officials has mobs of sheeple with them going yay,pat them More..

    Posted May-15-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Comment of user 'Alpha1' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • Youre supposed to have freedom of assembly, tell me how thats goin for ya when the LRAD is blowing your eardrums!

    Posted May-14-2012 By 

    (-2) | Report

  • Comment of user 'esauistheend' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!