Jonathan Lange: Natural Law Is Why The Second Amendment Is So Important

Jonathan Lange: Natural Law Is Why The Second Amendment Is So Important

It has been thirteen years since the Supreme Court last looked at the Second Amendment. In that case, District of Columbia v. Heller , it finally admitted that “the right to keep and bear arms” is an “individual” right to home defense, and not merely a right for states to maintain “a well-regulated militia.” In April of this year, the Court agreed to hear New York Rifle and Pistol Organization v. Corlett . This will address whether that right of individuals to “bear arms” gives constitutional protection for those who want to carry a firearm across town, or if one is only allowed to carry it from the bedroom to the kitchen. Meanwhile, there has been a spate of activity in California’s Ninth Circuit. Three separate cases from the lower courts have nullified different aspects of California’s virtual ban on the popular AR-15 (Armalite Rifle). Duncan v. Becerra overturned California’s ban on the standard 30-round magazine. Rupp v. Becerra and, more recently, Miller v. Bonta challenge California’s AR-15 ban as violating SCOTUS’ “ common use ” standard. If all this seems barely relevant except to preppers, this column is for you. My purpose today is not to get into the weeds of all these cases and reconcile the Court’s strange and contradictory pronouncements. Rather, I will simply outline a few basic concepts to help the non-gun-enthusiast appreciate what is at stake. We begin by observing that the most ardent defenders of the Constitution were opposed to the original Bill […]

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.