The Supreme Court, Guns, and the Columbine State

The risk of being a law enforcement officer has gone up with a Supreme Court decision that effectively repeals laws across the country limiting the rights of gun owners.

Officers who already have to make hair-trigger decisions will have no option but to shoot when someone lifts up what turns out to be a pop can.

There has been a series of incidents in recent years of Denver police mistakenly shooting and killing suspects who were not threat or a very unlikely one. Another shooting occurred this week when an unidentified man pulled a replica handgun from his pocket.

Gun rights' advocates have won.

Some writers are insisting that the court will approve reasonable limits. That is an assumption that may or may not be borne out in time.

For example, one judge said carrying guns might reasonably be banned near sensitive locations like schools. Colorado courts have already knocked down a University of Colorado rule banning students from bringing guns on campus.

Larimer County's sheriff said that if Colorado State University imposed a rule banning concealed weapons he would not enforce it.

And this is the state where the Columbine Massacre occurred. Of course there are those who say that if the massacre victims had been carrying guns they could have stopped it.

The court has chosen to take the 2nd Amendment literally. That means a gun owner has a right to not only keep a gun in the home, but to "bear" it.

If the nation needs access to guns to defend itself then it would make sense to include automatic rifles.

There was no indication in the court's 5-4 ruling that local governments would be able to ban the carrying of concealed weapons.

It's too late to argue whether lifting restraints on guns could unleash a bloodbath. The decision has been made.