Today's Supreme Court decision on gun laws in the District of Columbia illustrates why "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Even Antonin Scalia is not immune to irrational ideology. He has staked his entire integrity on the idea that the constitution should be interpreted as it was originally intended some 200 years ago, yet that did not keep him from giving the National Rifle Association the new interpretation they have been pressuring for over recent decades. The language of the Second Amendment is very clear; there is a right for states to organize militia and provide ways of arming their citizens, which may include widespread ownership of weapons. There is no individual right to own a weapon spelled out in the text; that leap requires artful interpretation.
Whether Scalia and his colleagues gave away the "strict construction" principle out of self-deception or because of political pressure is unclear, and possibly will never be known. But it demonstrates clearly that you cannot depend on the integrity of even someone as rock-ribbed as Scalia to protect your rights. He will sell you down the river if you happen to be on the wrong side of his political ideology or associations.
The moral analysis of this decision is very clear. The justices who voted for it will, in God's eyes, have blood on their hands for every gun-shot victim who could have been prevented by the laws they have struck down. These men are so enamored with the past that they do not seem to understand the conditions that exist today in most of our cities, and even on high school and college campuses. They are so out of touch with reality that they have decreed that state governments cannot regulate guns to the same degree that we regulate automobiles. That makes no moral sense. These are men bereft of a moral compass, at least in the context of today's urban America.