Sidney Rose should do his research before criticizing others. He asked for proof of the claim that the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the Second Amendment does, indeed, guarantee the right of individuals to own firearms.

The proof is the Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008). By their decision in this case, the Supreme Court did indeed hold that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Look it up, Mr. Rose.

Martin C. Hambel

Beverly Hills

(5) comments

lancel44

You still have people on the right advocating crazy, insane and even in some states criminals should own guns. Responsible gun owners would like this nonsense to stop. These people are an embarrassment to the majority of gun owners that want laws tightened and something done about assault weapons, which I own two and really have no use for. The NRA is corrupt and the gun lobby has been ripping gun owners off since 2007. They use political hysteria to jack up ammunition cost, and to create guns sales.

ceteguss

If Mr. Hambel had any clue what he was talking about, he would know the following: The so-called "Heller" case only applies to those that reside in the District of Columbia. The case he should have cited and discussed was McDonald v. City of Chicago, which applies to the 50 states and essentially reached the same conclusion as in Heller. That said, the Heller decision was written by Scalia stated that the right to bear arms did indeed have limits. He wrote, in his Heller opinion that "Nothing in our opinion should 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 and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms." Furthermore, since the 2010 decision in Mcdonald v. City of Chicago, the Supreme Court has declined to hear cases upholding assault weapon bans in Connecticut and New York, leaving those weapon bans in effect.

CitrusCo Citizen

Apparently, then you think it's perfectly o.k. for loony-tune men to have the right to mow down hundreds of innocent children, women, and men with their favorite weapon, AK-47s, whenever they're mad about something or just for the kicks of it. There's a mass shooting almost every day now--it's the new normal for Americans. Congratulations on achieving your goal and ruining our nation.

MikeBond

The 2nd amendment doesn't mean anything if you only believe in the Constitution when convenient. Just ask the Cherokee.

CitrusCo Citizen

Mike, . . .and the Seminoles, the Creeks, Powhatans, Lakota (Sioux), Blackfoot, Kiowa, Illini, and hundreds of other nations, tribes, clans, and families. The original, true, First Americans didn't have a chance against guns, germs, and steel of the invading immigrants.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.