• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • About Towleroad
  • Towleroad on Social Media
  • Privacy Policy

Towleroad Gay News

Gay Blog Towleroad: More than gay news | gay men

  • Body
  • Daily Resist
  • POLITICS
  • Travel
  • Music
  • Theatre
  • Film
  • TV
  • Sports
  • Business
  • Men
  • Marriage Equality
  • Space
  • Trans Rights
  • Books
  • Science
  • Gay Iconography
  • TowleREAD
You are here: Home / towleroad / The Second Amendment Does Not Prohibit Reasonable Gun Control Laws

The Second Amendment Does Not Prohibit Reasonable Gun Control Laws

October 2, 2017 by Ari Ezra Waldman Leave a Comment

AR-15 gun control laws
AR-15 Sporter SP1 Carbine per Gun News Daily (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Take a look at the Second Amendment. It provides that “a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Native English speakers might have trouble parsing that language, but for more than 200 years, federal judges understood it quite well. In a series of cases, the federal courts recognized that the right embedded in the Second Amendment was limited in two important ways.

First, the provision applied to having arms for military purposes. We may recall from our history classes that the early military in the colonies and in the young Republic was constituted mainly from regular citizens who took up arms to kick the British or defend themselves against rebellion.

Second, the provision applied to the federal government. For many years, all of the parts of the Bill of Rights — the first 10 amendments to the Constitution — only applied to the federal government. That meant, for example, that where the First Amendment said “Congress shall make no law …” abridging freedom of speech, religion, and the press, it meant only that the federal Congress “shall make no law.” State legislatures and local governments were free to pass laws that might have run afoul of the provision.

These two limitations are part of the Supreme Court’s 1939 decision in United States v. Miller. That case addressed a federal law banning the possession of, among other things, a sawed-off shotgun. Because, at the time, such a weapon was never going to be used by a “well regulated militia” or have any connection to warfare and national defense, Congress was within its power to restrict its use, possession, and sale.

Miller is still good law, but a decades-long effort by the National Rifle Association, the Heritage Foundation, and other right-wing advocacy organizations has both chipped away at Miller and created a generation of lawyers and jurists that don’t believe in it anyway.

In 2008, the Supreme Court decided that the Second Amendment protected an individual’s right to keep a handgun in his house for self-defense. That case, United States v. Heller, was about a law in the District of Columbia. Two years later, in McDonald v. Chicago, the Court held that Chicago could not outlaw the possession of handguns by private citizens. Both cases were decided 5-4.

I believe that Heller and McDonald were both wrongly decided. They fly in the face of Miller and McDonald, in particular, denies the reality that different states and localities have different kinds of gun problems. They should be allowed to approach it differently, both as a way to protect gun owners in Wyoming and gun shot victims in Los Angeles.

But despite the conservative onslaught radicalizing modern interpretations of the Second Amendment, there is nothing in either Heller or McDonald that would prevent a state or Congress from stepping in and outlawing the kind of weapons tragically used in Sandy Hook a few years ago and in Las Vegas just yesterday (and in Virginia, Colorado, and so many other places I can’t even remember!). I would go even further: The only reason Heller got a 5 person majority was because it was written so narrowly as to permit such restrictions.

First, Heller did not overrule Miller. Specifically, the Court “read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns.” At the time, sawed-off shotguns met that test. Today, machine guns are not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes. Hunters do not need machine guns. Those in need of self defense do not need machine guns. Machine guns can be banned.

Second, in writing Heller, the late-Justice Antonin Scalia specifically limited the decision not only to weapons used in self defense, but to weapons used in self defense in the home. It does not cover concealed weapons, firearms in the hands of felons or the mentally ill, or guns near schools or churches or hospitals. Nor does Heller say anything about selling guns or the ability of Congress to pass laws banning any of those things. You can be sure that many of the conservatives on the Court, including the new Justice Neil Gorsuch, seated on the Court in what can only be described as a coup, is going to try to use Heller to cover these situations. When they do, they will be lying. In spite of all of their efforts over the last few decades, the NRA and conservative jurists have failed to create an individual right to own and carry guns.

Congress’s inaction on gun safety has nothing to do with the law on the books. It has everything to do with politics. Elections matter. If you want reasonable gun safety legislation, we need more Democrats, in state houses, in governorships, in Congress, and in the White House.

Filed Under: towleroad Tagged With: Ari Ezra Waldman, Gays Against Guns, Gun Contol, Guns, Las Vegas, Law - Gay, LGBT, NRA, Supreme Court

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • Martina Navratilova Says Trans Women Should Not Be Allowed To Play Against Cis Women In Sports

    Martina Navratilova Says Trans Women Should Not Be Allowed To Play Against Cis Women In Sports

    8 hours ago
  • 77 Percent Of Black LGBTQ Youth Have Heard Family Members Say Negative Things: STUDY

    77 Percent Of Black LGBTQ Youth Have Heard Family Members Say Negative Things: STUDY

    12 hours ago
  • Don Cheadle Wore a ‘Protect Trans Kids’ T-Shirt on SNL

    Don Cheadle Wore a ‘Protect Trans Kids’ T-Shirt on SNL

    15 hours ago
  • Smollett’s Attorneys Deny The Actor Paid Two Brothers To Carry Out Attack

    Smollett’s Attorneys Deny The Actor Paid Two Brothers To Carry Out Attack

    18 hours ago
  • Alec Baldwin’s Trump Declares A National Emergency on SNL: WATCH

    Alec Baldwin’s Trump Declares A National Emergency on SNL: WATCH

    19 hours ago
  • ‘Drag Race All Stars’ Finale Ends with Yet Another Twist [RECAP]

    ‘Drag Race All Stars’ Finale Ends with Yet Another Twist [RECAP]

    1 day ago
  • LGBTQ World News Digest: 13 International Stories You Need to Know About

    LGBTQ World News Digest: 13 International Stories You Need to Know About

    2 days ago
  • Kelly Clarkson Belts Cover of Lady Gaga’s ‘Shallow’ — WATCH

    Kelly Clarkson Belts Cover of Lady Gaga’s ‘Shallow’ — WATCH

    2 days ago
  • Citing New Evidence, Police Release Two Individuals Without Charges in Jussie Smollett Case

    Citing New Evidence, Police Release Two Individuals Without Charges in Jussie Smollett Case

    2 days ago
  • Cardinal McCarrick Defrocked Over Child Sex Crimes in ‘Most Significant Abuse-Related Punishment in Modern History of Catholic Church’

    Cardinal McCarrick Defrocked Over Child Sex Crimes in ‘Most Significant Abuse-Related Punishment in Modern History of Catholic Church’

    2 days ago

Keep up with Provincetown:

Follow @PtownHacks on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter and sign up for the Ptown Hacks email list.

Footer

Copyright © 2019 · News Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in