Now that the Supreme Court has ruled on the 2nd Amendment, we should expect to see a flurry of gun rights activism all over the country. We should also expect to see desperate struggles for bureaucrats to retain their power of intimidation over the law abiding segment of the population. Bear in mind, once again, that it is this officious attitude that has resulted in a higher per capita incarceration rate than any other developed country.

Two things to keep in mind during these coming struggles - 1) The struggles will NOT affect criminals. What is being decided is whether law and order respecting citizens will be able to enjoy the right guaranteed by the Constitution. Criminals already ignore municipal, state and federal gun restrictions on a routine basis. 2) Despite the shrill harping you’ll hear from your bureaucrats nationwide, no one will be less safe if guns are permitted to LAW ABIDING citizens in places like Chicago, San Francisco and Atlanta’s Hartsfield Jackson International Airport. Those places will in fact, become safer. The more armed law abiding types you have roaming around, the safer you are. That is a safe rule of thumb to follow. This is a culture war of authoritarians against individualists.

Having said that, I would encourage you to take a moment to read how Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin and her posse are clearly stating that they are above the law.

If someone could get 50 concealed carry permit holders together, organize a legal defense for them, and have them show up at the airport with their weapons I would participate. I’d love to see the city of Atlanta try and win that battle in the Georgia court system - it is clearly unlawful for the city to try and declare any “gun free zones” that contradict state law. I am more interested in re-asserting my second amendment rights and expanding the scope of where I can carry without being harrased by petty bureaucrats than anything. I wouldn’t cry if Shirley Franklin lost sleep over not being able to tell me what to do either. I already drive to the airport with my gun fairly frequently - I’m not a threat to anyone non-violent on the premises. Someone needs to stand up before we’re all constantly bowing. If gun owners who have already been vetted by the state to carry showed up en masse and peacefully dared the police to arrest them, it would force the city to abide by the law. Maybe georgiacarry.org can get an organized protest together.

Update: Georgia Carry has filed a lawsuit against the City of Atlanta.

An attorney for Georgia Carry showed up at a press conference by Franklin and DeCosta to hand them a copy of the suit. DeCosta took it, while Franklin walked away.

Franklin and DeCosta had called the press conference to say they will stick with their no-guns policy for parts of the airport outside federal jurisdiction, which include parking lots and main lobby and ticketing areas. Franklin said she will lobby Congress to authorize gun bans in any public facilities that get federal funds.

I’d love it if someone could clarify for me who put Ben DeCosta in charge of all the airports in Georgia? I thought he was just Shirley Franklin’s personal lapdog and socialist associate.

And the first lawsuit against an American fiefdom that restricts its peons from defending themselves using the same instruments civil servants are allowed has been filed:

BELLEVUE, WA – Following Thursday’s (5-4) ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects an individual civil right to keep and bear arms, and that a municipal gun ban violates that right, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) filed a federal lawsuit (complaint) challenging the City of Chicago’s long-standing handgun ban.

While the Heller decision did not go far enough, it will open the floodgates to thousands of challenges to individual’s right to defend themselves. If the government is entitled to have a resource, then so am I - I will applaud each and every pro-gun lawsuit that is filed in the coming months.

If someone can show me a single American city that can definitively correlate reduced violence with a ban on gun ownership I will vote for Barack Obama in the upcoming election.

The most important decision the Supreme Court has ever made is coming soon.

This month, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to decide District of Columbia v. Heller, the most important Second Amendment case in the court’s history.

More than five years ago, six Washington, D.C., residents challenged the constitutionality of the city’s 32-year ban on all functional firearms in the home. If the challenge is successful, it will mean the court has revisited and perhaps reversed United States v. Miller, the second most important Second Amendment case in the court’s history. For nearly seven decades, gun controllers and gun rights advocates alike have struggled to apply the murky doctrines propounded by Justice James Clark McReynolds in his 1939 Miller opinion.

The Heller decision will be a practical choice. The “War on Drugs” is really a war on citizens - citizens who believe that they, not the state, are the ones who are in the best position to decide what should or should not pass into their own bodies. The “War on Drugs” created a new subset of Americans who are automatic criminals because they believe their bodies belong to them and not the state. If the Supreme Court decides that citizens have no individual right to bear arms, they will be creating another artificial class of criminals - people who believe that it is the individual and not the state that bears primary responsibility for his or her own security. If the Court creates an unnecessary, foolish and short-sighted “War on Guns” it will make the 40-year-old and completely unwinnable “We Own Your Body” war pale in comparison.

And Americans’ civil rights will continue to be spit on, ground into the dirt and thrown down the toilet. Let us all hope that the Court does not force my fellow gun owners and I to rise up and resist tyranny.