Liberal Forum

What Second Amendment absolutists forget about the Heller decision.The Heller case stemmed from a handgun ordinance in Washington, D.C. that required handgun owners to get a one-year license from the police chief and required owners to keep the guns locked and unloaded at home. Resident Dick Heller applied for a license, but was refused and then filed a lawsuit.In his majority opinion in the court's 5-4 ruling in Heller, Justice Antonin Scalia said the 2nd 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."But the justice also argued the protection has some limits."Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose ..." Scalia wrote that the opinion was not in conflict with bans on gun ownership for convicted felons or the mentally ill. He also did not argue against restrictions on gun-carrying in places like schools and government buildings.Carroll said Scalia's opinion also includes language that may help those who want restrictions on assault rifles and magazines that can hold large numbers of bullets.The justice wrote that the opinion should not be seen as casting doubt on "laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. (The court's 1939 Miller case) holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those 'in common use at the time' finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."LINKAlso:In Heller, Scalia articulated a fundamental right of self-defense, an unmentioned substantial right under the Second Amendment, which Scalia found to exist by implication.LINK