![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/2nd-amendment_2-1-300x233.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
A while ago Poetrooper brought out his Good Idea Fairy with the idea having a periodic article on the Second Amendment. A weekly, perhaps. He neglected to volunteer to provide the posts, however.
\nI didn\u2019t hate the idea, but felt it unnecessary for any of several reasons. So to keep what passes for peace in this family, I dedicate today\u2019s 2A post to Poetrooper. I\u2019m sure there\u2019ll be more.<\/p>\n
Frank Rizzo<\/strong><\/p>\n The right to keep and bear arms took a major advance in the 2008 Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller. According to a summary of the case, ruled 5-4 with Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority, \u201cThe Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.\u201d<\/p>\n The court followed that up with McDonald v. City of Chicago in 2010, extending the ruling to the states.<\/p>\n On April 26, the court decided to take up the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. New York has one of the strictest laws regarding the right to carry a concealed handgun\u2014it imposes a \u201cproper cause\u201d to issue permits. Users must demonstrate a compelling need for protection, such as carrying cash. In a press release supporting the case, the NRA stated that, \u201claw-abiding citizens should not be required to prove they are in peril to receive the government\u2019s permission to exercise this constitutionally protected right.\u201d<\/p>\n The petitioners argued against the state\u2019s \u201cproper cause,\u201d urging, \u201cThe time has come for this Court to resolve this critical constitutional impasse and reaffirm the citizens\u2019 fundamental right to carry a handgun for self-defense.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Sounds a lot like the PDRofMD\u2019s \u201cgood and substantial\u201d reason one must prove prior being allowed one\u2019s Second Amendment rights. These two requirements are defined nowhere, but are adjudicated by the whims of a board of unelected officials. <\/p>\n I hold no hopes for sweeping changes, but will wait with interest what the inevitable 5-4 vote will bring.<\/p>\n Great Neck Record<\/a><\/p>\n Thanks, Poe.*grin*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"