Gun-rights advocates have reason for concern
A call-in show on a local radio station has been humming this week over the prospect of new federal gun regulations, in the form of HR 45, introduced by U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois.
There were enough calls that Sen. Ben Nelson -- who by the way is highly rated by the National Rifle Association -- felt compelled to call the station, KICX, 96.1 mhz, to clarify his position on the issue. That was in spite of the fact the bill was introduced in the House of Representatives, while Nelson serves in the Senate.
Nelson assured listeners he would keep an eye on the bill in case it began to "get traction."
That's not likely. Although the sponsor, Bobby Rush, has the distinction of being the only person to have defeated Barack Obama in a race for public office, he is unlikely to gain wide enough support for this piece of legislation to pass.
But gun-rights advocates do have reason to be concerned. While the president says he respects the Second Amendment, he opposed concealed-carry laws and gun show sales, and favored bans on semi-automatic weapons in his past legislative careers.
The Second Amendment reads "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."
So far, the courts have generally held that the wording applies to individual ownership of guns, but not all jurists agree. The "well-regulated Militia" wording, they say, indicates the founders were referring to state-sanctioned military units, not individual gun owners.
It is President Obama's power to appoint judges who share the latter view which should give gun-rights advocates reason for concern.