SUPREME COURT RULES ON 2ND AMENMENT

WASHINGTON – Americans can keep guns at home for self-defense, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday in the justices’ first-ever pronouncement on the meaning of gun rights under the Second Amendment.

The court’s 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most federal firearms restrictions intact.

District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty responded with a plan to require residents of the nation’s capital to register their handguns. “More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence,” Fenty said.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: “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.”

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual’s right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by “the historical narrative” both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

The Constitution does not permit “the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home,” Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington’s requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.

Scalia noted that the handgun is Americans’ preferred weapon of self-defense in part because “it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police.”

Scalia’s opinion dealt almost exclusively with self-defense in the home, acknowledging only briefly in his lengthy historical analysis that early Americans also valued gun rights because of hunting.

The brevity of Scalia’s treatment of gun ownership for hunting and sports-shooting is explained by the case before the court. The Washington law at issue, like many gun control laws around the country, concerns heavily populated areas, not hunting grounds.

In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority “would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.”

He said such evidence “is nowhere to be found.”

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, “In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas.”

Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

Gun rights supporters hailed the decision. “I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom,” said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.

The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday’s outcome.

Chicago mayor Richard Daley said he didn’t know how the high court ruling would affect the city, but said that the ruling was “a very frightening decision.” He predicted an end to Chicago’s handgun ban would spark new violence and force the city to raise taxes to pay for new police.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, criticized the ruling. “I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it,” she said.

The capital’s gun law was among the nation’s strictest.

Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his Capitol Hill home a short distance from the Supreme Court.

“I’m thrilled I am now able to defend myself and my household in my home,” Heller said shortly after the opinion was announced.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller’s favor and struck down Washington’s handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.

The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.

Thursday’s decision was embraced by the president, said White House press secretary Dana Perino. “This has been the administration’s long-held view,” Perino said. “The president is also pleased that the court concluded that the D.C. firearm laws violate that right.”

White House reaction was restrained. “We’re pleased that the Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right of Americans to keep and bear arms,” White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.

Scalia said nothing in Thursday’s ruling should “cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.”

In a concluding paragraph to the his 64-page opinion, Scalia said the justices in the majority “are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country” and believe the Constitution “leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns.”

The law adopted by Washington’s city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.

Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.

Forty-four state constitutions contain some form of gun rights, which are not affected by the court’s consideration of Washington’s restrictions.

The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.

MICKMCK707

LEFT WING PROPAGANDA-TRAN TRONG DUYEY COMMANDER OF HANOI HILTON

Tran Trong Duyet – a sprightly retiree and amateur ballroom dancer – must rank as one of John McCain’s more unlikely supporters.

Four decades ago, during the Vietnam war, Mr Duyet was in charge of the notorious Hoa Lo prison – the place where Mr McCain says he was brutally beaten and tortured during five-and-a-half years as an American prisoner of war.

“McCain is my friend,” said 75-year-old Mr Duyet as he feeds the caged birds he now keeps in his garden in this coastal city.

“If I was American, I would vote for him.”

Informal chats

Navy pilot John McCain was shot down during a bombing raid over the North Vietnamese capital, Hanoi, in 1967.

He ejected from his aircraft and parachuted into a city lake – only to be dragged out by an angry crowd, barely conscious, and with two broken arms and a broken leg.

From there he was taken to Hoa Lo prison, known to its American military inmates as the “Hanoi Hilton”.

McCain was captured after his plane was shot down in 1967

McCain has since described enduring months of solitary confinement and systematic torture which drove him to try to kill himself.

“I don’t know how he’d react if he met me again,” said Mr Duyet, flicking through old black and white photographs of himself and his American prisoners at Hoa Lo.

“But I can confirm to you that we never tortured him. We never tortured any prisoners.”

Mr Duyet reminisces instead about how he often summoned the future US presidential candidate to his private office for informal chats.

“We used to argue about the war – about whether it was right or wrong,” he says.

“He is a very frank man – very conservative, and very loyal to his country and the American ideal.

“He had a very interesting accent and sometimes he taught me words in English and corrected my accent. I have followed his career since he left prison.”

Rapprochement

So is Mr Duyet implying that that Senator McCain lied about his treatment at the Hanoi Hilton?

“He did not tell the truth,” he says.

“But I can somehow sympathise with him. He lies to American voters in order to get their support for his presidential election.”

The “Hanoi Hilton” is now a museum – containing McCain’s flight suit

But Mr Duyet’s propaganda-perfect version of events is impossible to verify – and should be treated with caution in a country where the Communist authorities still keep a tight control over the media.

Relations between Vietnam and the United States have improved dramatically in recent years, following the normalisation of ties between the former enemies in 1995.

Mr McCain played a crucial role in bringing about that initial rapprochement – a fact which helps explain Mr Duyet’s enthusiastic support for the McCain presidential campaign.

“I wish him success in the presidential election,” he says.

“Of course the Americans started the war in Vietnam and killed so many people – but now we want to leave the past behind.

“So now I consider John McCain my friend because he did much to mend relations between our two countries. And if he becomes president he will do more to improve those ties.”

DO YOU BELIEVE THIS???

MICKMCK707