A Washington Times editorial applauds recent court rulings that uphold a citizens right to self-defense through gun ownership in the District of Columbia.
Whatever happens, this 2 to 1 ruling is a victory for ordinary citizens and the Constitution. The decision by the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia shifts the gun-control debate toward what is frequently called a "conservative" interpretation of the Second Amendment but what is properly called a constitutional interpretation. A citizen holds an inherent right to own firearms for self-defense, we have long contended, based on the plain language of the Second Amendment, which was the founders' commonsensical recognition that self-defense is itself an inherent right of a free people.
Dissenting Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson argued that "the District is inescapably excluded from the Second Amendment because it is not a State." I think it's amazing that a judge would consider any U.S. citizen "inescapably" exempt from the bill of rights, even D.C. residents.
Comments