By Margo Sullivan
Staff writer
June 27, 2008 01:20 am Al Bacon, owner of Al's Gun and Reel Shop in Derry, had one question yesterday about the U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 decision to strike down Washington, D.C.'s, handgun ban. Why was the court so divided over protecting the Second Amendment? "I just feel in my heart it should have been heavier in support of the amendment," he said, suggesting a 7-2 decision might have been more reasonable than 5-4. "I don't think it should have been that close. ... (But) it is a victory." The ruling marked the Supreme Court's first statement on the meaning of gun rights under the Second Amendment, which was ratified in 1791. The justices upheld the right of individuals to keep guns at home for self-defense, whether or not they are linked to a state militia. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion and said nothing in the decision 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." Experts said the ruling probably leaves most federal firearms restrictions on the books. Local residents on both sides of the gun control issue found something to applaud in yesterday's decision by the high court, although few were completely satisfied with the outcome. Gene Rochette, owner of Stateline Guns, Ammo and Archery in Plaistow, for example, said the court didn't give people any protection to carry a weapon. The court did clarify an individual's right to keep and bear arms, he said, but still allowed the government to require licenses for gun owners. He sees more lawsuits down the line, challenging the ruling and existing gun control laws. "In Massachusetts, you can't even touch a gun unless you have a permit," Rochette said. He predicted this high court ruling will be tested "when someone gets caught carrying a gun" without a license in a state with strict gun control laws. Laurel Redden of Salem feels so strongly about gun control laws that she boycotted any family vacations to Florida for five or six years after the Sunshine State became the "shoot first" state. Florida dropped the legal requirement for people who feel in peril to try to run away before they fire a gun. She's wondering if the Supreme Court decision will make other tourists shy away from the nation's capital. "As somebody about to take a trip down to Washington with my child this summer, I'm thinking twice," she said. But Redden said she was still encouraged to see that the high court agreed "reasonable gun control laws are constitutional." Redden, who previously was with the Million Mom March, said she doesn't object to law-abiding citizens carrying guns. "My beef comes in the ease with which criminals, teenagers, the mentally ill — people not really of the kind you want taking responsibility for a firearm — are able to access them so easily," she said. Rick Olson, president of the Londonderry Fish & Game Club, said the Supreme Court validated the view gun owners have held all along. "People like myself all across America have always contended the Second Amendment refers to an individual's right to bear arms," he said. "The state cannot institute total gun bans." Olson also said the FBI's crime data does not support anti-gun laws. "Anybody who looks at the crime data will see there are more deaths from choking, poisoning and automobiles per year than from handguns," he said. Bob Williams, owner of Affordable Guns in Pelham, said he thought the Supreme Court made the right call. But, Williams added, he didn't understand why the Second Amendment had to be challenged in the first place. Bacon, the Derry gun shop owner, also said he thinks these challenges encourage other opponents of the Second Amendment to keep trying. Surrounded by polished, dark wood racks of guns in his store, he pulled out a fact sheet from the National Shooting Sports Foundation showing that accidental gun fatalities are at their lowest levels in history. But states with tough gun control laws don't necessarily have good gun safety, he said, pointing to California as the prime evidence with 162 accidental fatalities versus one fatality in New Hampshire and none in Vermont. The bottom line is, people have the right to protect themselves, he said. "We fought for those rights," he said. "I'm not going to give them up." New Hampshire's Republican leaders applauded yesterday's Supreme Court decision. U.S. Sen. John Sununu's office released a statement saying the Supreme Court ruling got "it right." Former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen did not return calls asking for a comment. State Sen. Bob Clegg, who is trying to unseat Congressman Paul Hodes, said the ruling is a "significant step" and the Supreme Court came out on the side of gun advocates in recognizing the right to keep and bear arms. "We've always said we had it," Clegg said. "Other people said we didn't. The Supreme Court agrees with us." Former Congressman Jeb Bradley, who wants to oust Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter, said the ruling confirms what most Americans already knew — they have a constitutional right to protect themselves. The Supreme Court case is known as "Heller," short for District of Columbia v. Heller. Dick Heller, a 66-year-old armed security guard, sued the District after his application to keep a handgun at his home was rejected. He won an appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Material from The Associated Press was used in this report. ><p>
Second Amendment "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."
—
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.