As president of our school's 2nd Amendment Club, the Drexel Yeomen, I was lucky to get in touch with Alan Gura, lead counsel for Heller. He was gracious enough to come speak to our school.
He was a humble, extremely friendly guy who framed the gun debate from a purely constitutional perspective. I think everyone there, whether they support an individual or collective theory of gun rights, enjoyed Mr. Gura and learned quite a bit.
This is what Drexel had to say about the event:
Alan Gura, an attorney who waged a successful Supreme Court battle to strike down the Washington D.C. handgun ban, spoke with Drexel Law students on Jan. 21.
The lead counsel in the closely watched case of the District of Columbia v. Heller, Gura’s appearance was sponsored by Drexel Law’s Yeomen Society, a student organization that seeks to exercise and protect the constitutional right of individuals to keep and bear arms.
Gura said the Supreme Court struck down D.C.’s gun ban in July because it violated the constitutionally protected right of citizens to possess weapons that are commonly used for lawful purposes.
“Guns weren’t in common use for lawful purposes by D.C. citizens, but nationally, they were,” Gura said. “You have the right to the arms you need to protect yourself.”
The ruling overturned a 30-year-old law, Gura noted, predicting that many other gun laws will survive Supreme Court challenges.
“Most gun laws are going to survive strict scrutiny,” he said.
Yet states that seek to regulate gun ownership must do so through constitutional means, he said.
“Laws that assert a public safety purpose but can be shown to harass and create a bureaucratic nuisance are going to be struck down,” Gura said.
0 comments:
Post a Comment