As one would expect, the New York Times editorial page is not happy with the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the right to keep arms. But the language of their editorial is quite a bit over the top:
This is a decision that will cost innocent lives, cause immeasurable pain and suffering and turn America into a more dangerous country. It will also diminish our standing in the world, sending yet another message that the United States values gun rights over human life.
I doubt that the effects of this decision will be that far-reaching. It’s mainly just a slap in the face to jurisdictions that practice a particularly paternalistic form of government, where incomes are high, crime is low, and symbolism trumps substance. Criminals still commit most of the crime, and the criminal’s relationship with his weapon isn’t altered by the law.
For a more sensible analysis, see the Sacramento Bee’s Gun ban reversal has limited reach:
WASHINGTON â€“ The U.S. Supreme Court’s historic decision Thursday on the right to bear arms was a sweeping pronouncement of constitutional principles that will nonetheless have little practical impact in most of the country, legal experts said.
Now that’s more like it.