Bad news for criminals is also bad news for liberal journalists? Funny how you never poll the Supreme Court when they make one of their bonehead rulings quoting European laws or creating "rights" where the Constitution and the founding fathers never dreamed to go.
What the looney left needs to understand is that criminals are by definition "law breakers" so the only people harmed by the "feel good" laws of the left were law abiding people. Also, the presence of these same people in a community helps deter criminals since they never know if they might break into a home where people are armed. The greatest example of this was the increase in home invasion type crimes in areas like Washington DC after their idiot gun ban went into effect.

First off I will say I am thrilled that our civil liberties have been upheld. Since the Wanna be right have been in office we seem to be losing them so fast its hard to keep up. Secondly, I would like to ask adironackal how many times masked men with guns have invaded your home? Or possibly a family members home? or maybe even a neighboor or even anyone you know personally? When was the last time you even heard of it happening to a stranger on the local news (when they werent involved in some type of criminal activity themselves)? Sounds a little paranoid to me. And you have the nerve to call other people "looney."

This is a forum for all opinions. And yes, in bigger cities, it's called home invasions. If you live close to Mexico, you will understand this concept.

Although this is a victory for our civil liberties, I'm amazed that it was a 5 to 4 victory. 4 Supreme Court Judges were in favor of taking away our civil liberties. It gives meaning to having a conservative president pick judges who will not legislate from the bench, but uphold our basic rights.

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns

actually schdygirl....It has happened to two people I know right here in schenectady....dont you ever read the gazette?

I posted this in part in the Leader: Criminals will have guns whether guns are legal or not. I am glad that I have a choice. Why give criminals the advantage?

One other point, when a shooter goes into a public place with the intent to kill as many people as possible, I would feel safer that someone with a concealed weapon permit be present to take the shooter out before total damage occurs.

Just to clarify - there is no explicit right to self-defense within the Constitution or more specifically the second amendment. The "Right of the people to keep and Bear Arms" is a fraction of the run-on sentence divided by three commas that make up that amendment. Further, I'm not sure that the Supreme Court ruled that people have the right to own guns for self-defense. I think the Supreme Court ruled that the DC ban on handguns was unconstitutional - which it technically is.