Supreme Court Rules 2nd Amendment Right an Individual Right but Not an Unlimited Right

In a landmark decision today the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment grants an individual right to keep and bear arms. District of Columbia v. Heller struck down the District of Columbia’s handgun ban but also made it clear that the Constitution allows for reasonable restrictions on access to firearms.

“Today the Supreme Court took away the single biggest excuse for not passing tough gun laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous individuals,” said Cathie Whittenburg, Director of New England Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence (NECPGV). “The ‘slippery slope’ argument is gone.”

The gun lobby has long argued that common sense restrictions on guns are, in fact, nothing more than initial steps down a “slippery slope” that leads to a general gun ban. By holding that the Second Amendment prohibits the D.C. handgun ban, the Supreme Court has assured gun owners that there is no such “slippery slope”.

In affirming the ability to restrict the sale and possession of firearms the Court ruled:

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

The Court also noted that “The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools” for combating the problem of handgun violence, including the current firearm licensing requirement and “some measures regulating handguns.”

“While we are disappointed with today’s ruling and disagree with the individual right interpretation NECPGV will continue to push for reasonable, common sense gun violence prevention laws,” said Whittenburg.

NECPGV advocates for laws that require background checks on all gun purchases; limiting handgun purchases to one per month; require gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms to law enforcement officials; crack down on illegal guns and gun trafficking; and regulate military-style assault weapons and .50 caliber sniper rifles.

Today's Headlines

The Supreme Court will soon be handing down their ruling on the 2nd Amendment. The gun laws in this nation are absurdly weak. Let us hope the Supreme Court decision does not make them even weaker. Here is a sampling of today's headlines that reflect this nation's easy access to guns:

Texans Fuel Mexican Drug Wars with 'Virtual Arsenals' of Easy-buy Guns

New York Must Not Tolerate 'Absurdly Easy Access to Guns' Among Youth

27 Handguns, Machine Pistols Seized from US-Canada Gun Runners

Georgia is 'Leading Source' of Crime Guns, Trafficking to Other US States

Two guns were used in Oklahoma roadside killing of 13-year-old and 11-year-old girls

Maine Crime Guns Go North and South

Two years ago Stop Handgun Violence unveiled a new 250-foot billboard near Fenway Park in Boston. The message: “Stop Traffic – Background Checks Stop Crime” pointing to four states that provide high numbers of crime guns to Massachusetts. One of the states was Maine.
ATF gun trace data shows that Maine is the second leading crime gun source state for Massachusetts and that the number of guns traced back to Maine has risen over the past few years.
Maine’s weak gun laws allow criminals easy access to guns. In May, 2006, a Lynn, Massachusetts man pleaded guilty to being an unlicensed arms dealer after being charged with trafficking 28 handguns. The majority of these guns had been purchased in Maine through ads in a local swap and sell guide. These were private sales with no background checks, no records kept, no questions asked.
But Maine guns aren’t just trafficked south into Massachusetts, they are also smuggled north into Canada. Canadian police were busy this week seizing guns smuggled from Maine into Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. In Halifax, police seized assault rifles from at least two addresses. The guns included Uzi and Mac-10 submachine-guns and AR-15 assault rifles.
In New Brunswick, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police worked with the Maine Drug Enforcement Agency and the ATF on an operation that lead to the arrest of 33 people on charges of illegal importation of firearms, drug offences and possession of child pornography. Unfortunately, police believe that the group had already trafficked 99 percent of the guns smuggled into Canada before the raid.
Maine legislators hide behind Maine’s low crime rate as a reason to not pass stronger gun laws. But it is obvious that Maine’s weak guns laws are a danger not just to Mainers but also to its neighbors to the north and the south.

Incompetent to stand trial but still legally able to own guns

In 2005, Scott Buchanan was found incompetent to stand trial. Buchanan had been charged with theft, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest after an incident at the New Hampshire Division of Motor Vehicles. At the time of his arrest police seized a handgun from his car and as a condition of bail Buchanan surrendered his AK-47. Charges against Buchanan were later dropped after he was found incompetent to stand trial because of his excessive and unusual paranoia about police and the government.

Now, Buchanan wants his guns back. And he just might get them. The New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled, in a unanimous decision, that being incompetent to stand trial should not be equated with an adjudication as a mental defective under federal law, and therefore such a person should not be automatically prohibited from possessing firearms. Buchanan is now back in lower court, seeking the return of his guns.

According to court documents, being competent to stand trial “focuses upon whether the defendant has a rational and factual understanding of the proceeding against him and sufficient present ability to consult with and assist his lawyer on the case with a reasonable degree of rational understanding.” And that this is not “directly related to dangerousness or the ability to contract or manage one’s own affairs which are requirements of the federal definition of adjudicated as a mental defective.”

Under this ruling it is therefore possible for someone to be found incompetent to stand trial and still be able to possess firearms. The court can find that you don't have the rational understanding to participate in a court proceeding against you but that shouldn't stop you from owning a handgun, an AK-47, or any other type of gun. Now that’s insane.

Should You Become President What Will You Do To Combat Illegal Guns and Gun Trafficking?

Our communities are suffering from a plague of illegal guns. Every day in America gun traffickers take advantage of weak state and federal laws. As a result, people in our neighborhoods are being shot and killed or wounded, people are being robbed, threatened and intimidated with these illegal guns.

A question for Senators Clinton, McCain and Obama: “Should you become President, in addition to enforcing current laws, what steps would you take to combat this enormous problem of gun trafficking and illegal guns?”

Guns start out being legally manufactured and legally sold to licensed firearms dealers. From there, guns move from the legal to the illegal market through a variety of predictable, and preventable, avenues.

* Studies show that 1 percent of gun dealers sell 57 percent of gun crimes. These rogue gun dealers have a vastly disproportionate impact on public safety. The ATF can recognize such dealers based on: (1) guns stolen from inventory; (2) missing federal sales records, needed by police to solve crimes; (3) having 10 weapons a year traced to crimes; (4) frequently selling multiple guns to individual buyers; and (5) short times between gun sales and their involvement in crimes. Yet ATF enforcement capabilities are constantly being weakened, not strengthened, by Congress.

* Straw purchases and multiple gun sales are a large source of illegal guns. A straw purchase is when someone who is not eligible to buy a gun has another person buy one for them. Multiple sales (someone who is purchasing 10, 20, 50 guns a month) are often a sign of illegal gun trafficking. A few states have adopted laws that restrict handgun sales to one handgun a month.

* Stolen guns are also a large source of illegal guns. Guns are stolen from homes and from cars. And sometimes, when police trace guns back to an owner, “the gun was stolen” is used as a simple excuse to cover up an illegal sale. This is why more states are pushing for laws that would require lost and stolen guns be reported to police within 24 hours.

* Private gun sales, where there is no background check run, no records kept, and no questions asked, help fuel the illegal gun market. It is estimated that only 60% of firearms are sold through licensed dealers – meaning that 40% of guns can be legally sold without background checks. This is a system open to abuse. Everyday at gun shows, in newspaper ads, over kitchen tables, guns are sold in private sales to felons, juveniles, domestic abusers, and other prohibited people (including those with serious mental illness) with no background check run, no records kept and no questions asked.

So, the question to the presidential candidates is: “Should you become President, in addition to enforcing current laws, what steps would you take to combat this enormous problem of gun trafficking and illegal guns?”

District of Columbia V. Heller case to be heard this week

This week, for the first time in 70 years, the Supreme Court will hear a case involving the 2nd Amendment. They will be asked to decide if the right to keep and bear Arms is an individual right or a right that is reserved for the well regulated Militia. The case, the District of Columbia v. Heller, centers around D.C. guns laws, but the ruling has potentially far reaching consequences.

New England Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence is part an amicus brief filed in support of the petitioner, Washington, D.C., urging the court to overturn the lower court decision and to uphold D.C. gun laws.

For a complete list of the Amicus briefs filed go to: http://www.vpc.org/Amici%20comparison%20list.pdf

To read specific briefs in favor of the petitioner go to: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/amicus-briefs-for-dc-available-in-guns-case/

To read specific briefs in favor of the respondent go to: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/amicus-briefs-for-heller-available-in-guns-case/

C-span will air the audio of the oral arguments as soon as they are released. For more information go to: http://www.c-span.org/

Vermonters want stronger gun laws

WCAX, channel 3, in Burlington, Vermont recently conducted a phone survey of randomly called, likely voters. They asked one simple question: Would you favor or oppose the state passing new legislation to restrict sale or ownership of guns?
The answer was a resounding “yes!” By a more than 3 to 2 margin (57 percent in favor, 35 percent opposed, 8 percent not sure) Vermonters expressed their desire for stronger gun laws.
The report (which aired on February 28th) sought reaction to this poll from a number of people. A member of Gun Owners of Vermont said that, given the decline in hunting over the years, she was not surprised by the response. She added, “I’m sure over time Vermont’s legislation will reflect the will of the people which may well change as it does.” The spokesperson for New England Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence (thank you Eliot Nelson!) noted that “this poll reflects that there is reasonable ground for legislative efforts.”
It comes as no surprise that, even in Vermont, people see the need for stronger gun laws. Vermont has seen a recent rise in gun violence (four drug-related gun incidents, including a homicide, in Rutland over the past three months). And across the nation we continue to see mass shooting after mass shooting. (Just this week, a gunman opened fired at a Wendy’s restaurant in Florida, killing one and wounding five others before turning the gun on himself. In Memphis, four adults and two children are shot and killed and three other children wounded in a killing that has left police with no suspects and no motive.)
Americans understand that this country needs stronger gun laws. So why is this so difficult for elected officials to understand?
WCAX also interviewed the State Senate head of the Judiciary Committee and the Vermont governor. Both express surprise over the poll results. Both denied the need for stronger gun laws. And, just like all the presidential candidates, they expressed their support for the 2nd Amendment. (does the 2nd Amendment mean no gun laws??)
If the people want stronger gun laws why are our elected officials so opposed? Because they believe the propaganda of the gun lobby, they believe that voting for stronger gun laws means voting to end their political careers. The majority of calls, emails, and letters to legislators come from gun rights people. This has to change. Take a moment, find your legislator, and let them know that gun violence prevention is important to you. Tell them it is time to work for stronger gun laws.