News came out yesterday of the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision supporting the long-advocated position of the National Rifle Association: the ownership of the means of self-defense—including guns—is a basic right of all individuals. The drafters of the Constitution, having first-hand experience in the protecting their families and property from foreign and domestic enemies, viewed the Second Amendment as an essential component in the preservation of a free society.
Two years ago, the Court ruled that the Federal Government could not ban guns, the only immediate effect of which was felt in DC, where Congress acts as the City Council, and where the heaviest gun laws were in place, but yesterday’s decision applies it to the state level. This means that, effectively, the gun-rights issue is a non-issue—the fight is over.
With that fact in mind, I wonder what will become of the loudest and most influential advocate of gun ownership, the NRA. With gun rights off the political table, will the NRA simply fade into history books? Perhaps the timing couldn’t be better, having lost their famous spokesman barely two years ago.
It’s unlikely that the group will disappear. They will probably morph into an ACLU-style group that hunts down states and municipalities that push regulations that are heavy enough to resemble a ban. What really becomes of the NRA is anyone’s guess, but you can count on them losing their status as a political heavyweight in the among the special-interest camps.