In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court overturned the Washington D.C. gun ban. However, the decision was anything but a slam dunk, as clearly it should have been.In a 5-4 decision, it is obvious that the liberal wing of the court will choose ideology over reason.Most constitutional scholars, even those who consider themselves left of center, agree that theSecond Amendmentprovides an individual right to keep and bear arms. You don't have to like it, or be a constitutional scholar,but any honest interpretation of the Bill of Rights plainly refers to the rights of individuals, not the rights of government. TheConstitution grants power and authority to government, not rights.Even liberal columnist Eugene Robinson agreed: "I've never been able to understand why the Founders would stick a collective right into the middle of the greatest charterof individual rights and freedoms ever written--andgive it such pride of place, the No. 2 position, right behind such bedrock freedoms as speech and religion." Robinson, whose honesty is refreshing,called for gun control advocates to amend the Constitution, not ignore it.What a delicious twist of irony that these liberal justices willroutinely claim to stand upfor the rights of individuals against government intrusionbut only when it suits their worldview. None of the Bill of Rights are safe when justices will scour the "penumbras formed by emanations" to justify their decisions.Fortunately, the Heller decision may ultimately allow citizens who heretofore have been denied reasonable means of self-defense. It is a right they were born with anda right they may finallyrealize.

Michael Nevin Jr. receives e-mail at nevin166@comcast.net.