Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Encyclopedia
The Second Amendment declares that, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
To many, the language of the amendment appears to grant to the people the absolute right to bear arms. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the amendment merely protects the right of states to form a state militia (United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, 59 S. Ct. 816, 83 L. Ed. 1206 [1939]).
|
The view of the Supreme Court is in line with my beliefs. The so called "right to bear arms" is in fact the right to maintain a militia. If you are not an active member of a militia, then you do not have the constitutionally protected right to bear arms. If you believe that you have a fundamental right to bear arms, that can be your belief, but to own a gun is a privelage for the responsible, not a right for the masses.
As to the handgun ban in the UK, it is not an apt comparison to the DC gun ban. The UK gun ban is occouring on an island, and is country-wide. The same is hardly true for Washington D.C. That might explain the differences in success. Just for the sake of information, Britain remains one of the countries with the lowest homicide rate in the world accounting for 853 homicides in the reporting period 2003/04 according to the Home Office's Crime Statistics. (
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/page40.asp) I'd like to take this opportunity to congratulate our older brother, the UK ,for several years of decreasing violence.