HANDGUN CASE: The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether the District of Columbia can ban handguns, a case that could produce the most in-depth examination of the constitutional right to "keep and bear arms" in nearly 70 years.

WHEN: The court probably will hear oral arguments in March, with a decision expected before the end of June.

CASE FOCUS: The main issue is whether the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own guns or instead merely sets forth the collective right of states to maintain militias. The former interpretation would permit fewer restrictions on gun ownership.

Supreme Court Will Hear Guns Case

By The Associated Press

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

            Every election cycle we hear two versions of interpretation from the left about the second amendment. According to their political ideology it simply does not entitle individuals to possess weapons or at best they are in favor of supporting hunting rights. From those Democrats who wish to appear moderate we will watch them do silly stunts of dressing in fatigues and going hunting somewhere.

            The problem is that the 2^nd amendment simply has nothing to do with hunting. Our Founding Fathers were most concerned with protecting us the people from the government:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

-The Declaration of Independence

It is simply impossible for an unarmed people to be truly free. Any freedoms they do receive will be at the mercy of the government with its consent, and any man who is at the mercy of a governing official is not truly free. The armed society is ruled by its consent and is able to protect its rights that are inalienable and never to be altered or granted by the consent of others:

they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

-The Declaration of Independence

As a country we stand at a great crossroads. Will America truly remain free? Or more importantly, will the Supreme Court allow us to remain free?

-Tim