Anemic ruling may be sufficient

Less than a week after the release of the ruling by the Supreme Court on the handgun ban in Washington DC, thousands of articles and blogs have already presented analysis of it. Many will have good analysis and some will be tripe. I have read virtually none of it, but I have put in some time looking at the ruling itself, and therefor will add my two cents to the growing mountain of analysis. I only pray that I may be clear and accurate.

The US Supreme Court ruling on the 2nd Amendment is overly narrow and shallow. After 99 days of deliberation (and apparently, some infighting) they came to a 5 to 4 decision, with the minority providing not just one, but two, dissenting opinions. Despite Justice Scalia writing 63 pages of well defined logic, the resulting majority opinion is downright anemic.

But it may be sufficient.

The actual ruling only applies to Washington DC. And only to the encroachment of a total ban on any working firearm. And only to those kept in the home. And it leaves an opening to force registration and licensing of ALL firearms.
(I must admit, at this point, that some of these limitations on their ruling are inherent in the underlying case brought before them - especially that the plaintiff sought ONLY permission to own a handgun in his own home for self defense, and was content to allow the District of Columbia to regulate and license that right as if it were a permission.)

But it decouples the first and second clauses of the 2nd Amendment. And that may be the key. It also clarifies that the word "people" means people, and does not have some cryptic satanic reverse meaning that can only be seen by liberals.

Already, several suits have been filed, attempting to force other cities to
grant those rights which are granted by God, and guaranteed by our Constitution. Many of these will be successful. Especially in the Fifth Circuit, where I live. Some of them will fail. Quite possibly, the Ninth Circuit might find some cryptic satanic message in the writings of the Supreme Court that allow it to ignore the plain meaning of Justice Scalia's writings.

But the decoupling of the first and second phrases in the Amendment and defining the word "people" to mean citizens, will dispel a lot of the liberal tripe that surrounds this subject.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/dc-v-heller-round-up/

Supreme Court Decision, pdf format

May it please be sufficient.

And if anyone wishes further analysis from me, I will try to oblige.