Supreme Court Gives NRA The Finger, Refuses To Hear This Ridiculous Case


The conservative Supreme Court will bow to special interests when it comes to things like Hobby Lobby, Citizens United and The Affordable Care Act, but when it comes to guns they’ve made it clear:  Don’t bother us, we’re busy. Guns for self-defense are constitutionally protected. States have the right to regulate as they see fit. Be gone.

The second amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms. Congress and the President decide which arms are suitable for the general population. Every time a town, county, or state tries to make a law regulating the use of those guns, the NRA thinks it’s their job to stand in the way.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

The question is…Why? The most recent case brought to the Supreme Court for review and declined is out of San Francisco, where a law requiring that legally owned firearms be stored in a locked box or with a trigger lock. The NRA contends that SCOTUS says guns are legal for self-defense, but this common sense safety law makes it impossible for those guns to be immediately accessed for that purpose.

Essentially the NRA is advocating for paranoid lunatics who keep loaded weapons under their pillows or in nightstand drawers.

Imagine you hear a sound in your house. You fear an intruder is inside. Luckily you have a gun, and even though statistically it will be taken from you and used to kill you more often than reasonable people are comfortable with, you decide to grab it.

Count in your head as you press an imaginary four digit code. Did that time, which should be under three seconds, seem as though it would make the difference between life and death?

Of course not. What those three seconds do accomplish is keeping that same gun out of the hands of a child, who is far more likely to take a life than an intruder.

There were two dissenters on the Court that would have liked to have heard the case. Justices Thomas and Scalia (surprise, surprise), agreed with the challengers of the lower court’s ruling to uphold the law.

Thomas said that the San Francisco law “allows residents to use their handguns for the purpose of self-defense, but it prohibits them from keeping those handguns operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense” during times that “they are most vulnerable.”

Again, count to three. Three seconds to potentially save lives. It’s a no brainer.


 

Image: SupremeCourt.gov

Terms of Service

Leave a Reply