Ruling draws mixed response

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling Thursday that a specific right to gun ownership exists for individuals brought a curiously mixed response, muted in some unexpected places.

The reaction broke less along party lines than along the divide between cities wracked with gun violence and rural areas where gun ownership is embedded in daily life. Democrats have all but abandoned their long push for stricter gun laws at the national level after deciding it's a losing issue for them. Republicans welcomed what they called a powerful precedent.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, straddling both sides of the issue, said he has "always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures."

Republican presidential candidate John McCain scolded Obama over his reaction and hailed the decision as "a landmark victory" for individual rights. But, McCain warned, "This ruling does not mark the end of our struggle against those who seek to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. We must always remain vigilant in defense of our freedoms."

McCain was among a group of congressional members who signed a written brief to the Supreme Court arguing that the handgun ban of Washington, D.C., was unconstitutional; Obama was not.

The basic issue for the justices was whether the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia. That's been the heart of the gun control debate for decades. Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said an individual right to bear arms exists and is supported by "the historical narrative" before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

President Bush welcomed the decision.

"I applaud the Supreme Court's historic decision today confirming what has always been clear in the Constitution: the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear firearms," he said.

D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty said Washington would implement a plan to require residents to register their handguns, but he cautioned: "More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence."

Gun-rights advocates praised the decision.

"I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.

The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several Chicago suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley called the ruling "very frightening" and predicted more violence and higher taxes to pay for extra police if his city's gun restrictions are lost.

Some Democrats welcomed the ruling.

"This opinion should usher in a new era in which the constitutionality of government regulations of firearms is reviewed against the backdrop of this important right," said Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont.

But Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who became mayor of San Francisco in 1978 after Mayor George Moscone was fatally shot in City Hall, predicted the decision is going "to open the doors to litigation against every gun safety law that states have passed – assault weapons bans, trigger locks and all the rest of it."

Compiled from the Associated Press, Washington Post and Chicago Tribune.