The Supreme Court v. The Court Of Last Resort

Last week, the United States Supreme Court disgraced itself with a ruling about which the only good thing that can be said is that it perhaps could have been worse.  The case, Heller v. DC concerned the efforts of a District resident to exercise his inherent, natural right to effective self-defense.  The federal government, through its subordinate creation, the local government of the District, has been infringing upon this right in plain violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which says that, "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."

This case could have, and should have, been disposed of by any court in the federal judicial hierarchy by way of a simple, two-or-three page observation of some of the overwhelming body of authoritative evidence of the Founders’ intent, a brief application of grade-school-level logic, or even just a citation or two from the long-standing Supreme Court jurisprudence on this subject, which had, in the past, contented itself with merely the grade-school-logic alone, viewing the meaning of the plain words of the amendment as so self-evident as to merit no lengthy discussion.

Read the rest of this excellent article here: