Public Safety Blog - Public Safety Discussion - Public Safety News » Blog Archive

The Right to Public Safety II

2008 Jun 27 Posted by Joseph Pascarella

A few months ago, we posted here that the United States Supreme Court was adjudicating a very important decision regarding firearms control policy in the case of Washington, D.C. v. Heller.

According to legal analysts, this ruling will have little effect on existing policies and laws.

The case centers around a local law in Washington, DC that bans the possession of handguns in the home for self-defense. The United States Supreme Court ruled in Heller that the law violated the Second Amendment of the Constitution by a 5-4 ruling. This split is consistent with the divide in the United States regarding firearms control policy in that a significant percentage of citizens feel that firearms are dangerous weapons that should be banned while a significant percentage of citizens consider the possession of firearms a Constitutional right.

In the middle are Public Safety personnel that must confront violence on a daily basis. Part of the issue is that regardless of the laws and policies, many criminals flout the existing laws and policies rendering them of little utility.

June 27, 2008 | Filed under: Capella, Capella University, Law enforcement, Public Safety Signals, Public safety, crime, education, online college, online degrees, online university, violence
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

4 Responses to “The Right to Public Safety II”

Ron Wallace Says:

This Supreme Court ruling was one of the top stories covered on NPR yesterday. One report indicated that some gun rights advocates have already stated that they will use this ruling as a basis for filing suits against gun ownership restriction laws in cities such as Chicago, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. Additionally, the story reported that this ruling may be used as a basis to challenge other laws such as requirements to register firearms and prohibitions against gun ownership in domestic violence cases. While legal analysts indicate that the ruling will have little effect on existing policies and laws, it appears that the Courts will be asked to review the legality of many gun control laws currently on the books.

June 27th, 2008 at 6:13 am

Joy Spicer Says:

While it does clog the cogs, sometimes it breaks up the cobwebs… I think it’s a good thing that Courts will be asked/forced to review the legality of the exisiting gun control laws. Sometimes what is on those books was relevant for a different time.

June 27th, 2008 at 4:57 pm

Jack Monell Says:

As one who worked in the District at the Federal level for years, this debate has always been a hot topic within the Public Safety community. Quite honestly, as Joe stated, whether legal or not, our criminals will continue to obtain firearms to commit violent offenses. The right to protect one’s self is definitely a constitutional right, but arming citizens can also contribute to another element of concern for our law enforcement personnel who are charged with protecting the community….. Time will only tell as to the extent of this ruling…..

June 28th, 2008 at 8:36 am

Joseph Pascarella Says:

Ron, Joy, and Jack,

I do agree that this ruling appears to muddle the debate over firearms control and now will create more litigation, not clarification.

Joe

July 4th, 2008 at 5:12 am

Let us know what you think. All comments will be reviewed prior to going live. Comments that are profane or obscene, or unrelated to the topic of the post will not be published.

About

Public Safety Signals provides a venue for those working or interested in the public safety field to join in a conversation about the latest news, trends and important issues related to public safety. The authors are experienced professionals and educators in the field of public safety, but your topic suggestions and insightful comments are needed to keep this site relevant and engaging.