Texas-Book-Gun Law Armed And Educated - Flipbook - Page 18
defense. The Heller Court stated that, “we do not read the Second
Amendment to protect the right of citizens to carry arms for any
sort of confrontation,” focusing their decision on self-defense.
Further, the Miller Court stated that the weapons protected were
those “in common use at the time” of the decision. This is supported
by historical traditions of prohibiting the carry of “dangerous and
unusual weapons” that are commonly used by criminals offensively,
as opposed to by law-abiding citizens for defensive purposes.
The Second Amendment does not protect against legislative
prohibitions on firearm possession by felons and the mentally ill.
Heller made this point in its decision, and many circuit court cases
such as U.S. v. Everist, 368 F.3d 517, 519 (5th Cir. 2004), which
had previously used the same reasoning prior to Heller. The Fifth
Circuit Court of Appeals in U.S. v. Everist stated that the Second
Amendment is subject to “limited narrowly tailored specific
exceptions or restrictions for particular cases that are reasonable;
it is clear that felons, infants and those of unsound mind may be
prohibited from possessing firearms.” Along this same train of
thought, the U.S. Supreme Court did not want to eliminate laws
that imposed conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale
of firearms.
It also does not mean that the Second Amendment includes the
right to carry anywhere a person wants. The Heller Court stated
that their opinion was not meant to allow the carrying of firearms in
sensitive places, such as schools and certain government buildings.
Brief Legal History Of The Right To Bear Arms And The Laws Regulating Firearms | 7
