Supreme Court Asked to Clarify What it Means to ‘Bear’ Arms

'You might think the question would be settled by now, but the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to opine on whether the Second Amendment right to “bear” arms for self-defense extends outside the home.

We may soon get an answer. Lyle Denniston, writing for the Constitution Daily, reports about two gun rights cases that may get a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court. Both cases hinge on the difference between the right to “keep” a gun and a right “bear” one. The National Rifle Association thinks the issue is ripe for Supreme Court review. The justices are expected to discuss the cases next week and may then decide whether to grant review.

Writes Mr. Denniston:

The Supreme Court in 2008 made it clear that the right to “keep” a gun is a personal right, and that it means one has a right to keep a functioning firearm for self-defense within the home. But it has refused repeatedly since then to take on the question of whether that right exists also outside the home. If there is a separate right to “bear” a gun (and the Court, in fact, did say in 2008 that the two rights were separate), it has not said what that means.

The NRA says you can’t really ‘bear’ something in the privacy of your home'.

No votes yet

Of course the right exists outside the home, since YOU can exist outside your home, and in fact most of the RISKS for which armament is for, are outside the home. What sort of moron believes that you don't have the right to defend yourself when in the public space? American rights are universal. They exist regardless of where you are and when you are.

This thread exhibits one of the most stupid arguments ever proposed.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.