Interview: The Way of the Gun

Interview: Meet Dr. Robert Levy, the lawyer whose Second Amendment challenge to D.C.’s strict gun laws could deal a death blow to gun control nationwide.

By Leigh Ferrara

April 19, 2007

TOOLS E-mail article Print article BACKTALK E-mail the editor

A little more than a month before Cho Seung-Hui went on a murderous rampage at Virginia Tech, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its ruling in a landmark gun rights case, Parker v. District of Columbia, repealing the District’s stringent gun laws. Leading the Second Amendment challenge was Cato Institute senior fellow and constitutional lawyer Dr. Robert Levy, who, despite offers of financial assistance from Cato, has bankrolled the three-year effort himself. Levy wielded a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment to dissolve the strictest gun regulations on the books in any state (or district), arguing that the Second Amendment protects the rights of individuals, not just militias, to bear arms. Parker marked the first time in history that the Second Amendment broad interpretation has been used to overturn a state gun law. It’s likely that the Supreme Court will eventually review the decision and if the Court upholds the D.C. Circuit court opinion, it will have far-reaching implications nationwide—making state gun laws ever more vulnerable to legal challenges. Interestingly, Levy’s case has not only been a subject of concern among gun control advocates, but to the National Rifle Association as well, which fears the impact of a negative Supreme Court ruling.

From his home in Naples, Florida (where he claims he doesn’t need a gun), Levy talked to Mother Jones about his Second Amendment victory, his frustrations with the National Rifle Association, and the impact of the Virginia Tech shootings on the gun rights movement.

Mother Jones: For the past three years, this lawsuit has been your baby. What made you so passionate about challenging the gun laws in D.C.?

Robert Levy: I’m passionate about a lot of issues. I’ve done work on tort reform and tobacco litigation, post 9-11 civil liberties such as the Patriot act, detention of U.S. citizens, profiling, and NSA wire taps. So the Second Amendment is just one of the many issues that I feel passionate about.

MJ: Why D.C.?

RL: The reason deals with incorporation. When the Constitution was originally ratified for the Bill of Rights, it only applied to the federal government. All of that changed after the Civil War when the 14th amendment was ratified. And since that time, it’s been pretty well settled that most of the Bill of Rights can be applied to the states as well as the federal government, but it hasn’t been resolved whether the Second Amendment applies to the states. To avoid having to deal with that issue, we chose D.C., because it is not a state.

MJ: Are you a gun owner?

RL: No.

MJ: Are you a hunter, or a target shooter?

RL: Nope. I haven’t had a gun since I was in the Air Force in the 1960s.

MJ: From the beginning, were you considering that the Second Amendment challenge to this one law would have such far-reaching implications?

RL: Oh sure. We knew that it would have far-reaching implications because the Supreme Court had not dealt with a Second Amendment case since 1939. Meanwhile, 10 of the 12 judicial circuits, all except the 5th Circuit in Texas and the D.C. Circuit, had determined that Second Amendment did not secure individual right, instead that it applied only to members of the militia. And in some cases they determined that the Second Amendment didn’t apply to states. So we knew that if we were to win in D.C., it would be a major victory with profound implications across the country.

Next Page
Page 1 of 3

Post a Comment
Your Name:
Your Comment:
	Please press "Submit" only once to avoid double-posting. All HTML formatting is removed from comments. Read the Mother Jones community rules here.

Comments:

I'm always surprised that so many on the left are against the Second Amendment. When asked to explain why, the response usually runs along the lines of , "those on the right have a lot more guns than we do, so we should be against guns". The trouble is that this argument can also be applied to "freedom of the press". Since the right wing owns most of the media, does that mean we should be against private ownership of the press. Anyone think we would be better off if "the government" had a monopoly on the news? Why would anyone want "the government" (and criminals) to have a monopoly on guns?

Posted by:Jim HigginsMay 27, 2007 10:21:27 AMRespond ^

This case has promise to help restore the natural individual right to bear arms, but it does very little for the civic duty to serve in the militia. The Second Amendment defines a responsible citizen as one who bears arms and is prepared to serve in the militia. It is a natural right and a civic duty. The Second Amendment claims it is essential to have such citizens to safeguard and secure the freedoms that were won through such sacrifice of the brave militiamen and their families during our early history. Our freedoms were gained by heroes like the militiamen who left bloody footprints behind in the snow as they entered Trenton in a blinding blizzard to reverse the fortunes of the Revolutionary War. If we do not have such citizens today, our freedoms are automatically in danger. We don’t have such citizens because the militias have been folded into the National Guard and much of the general population has little experience with guns. Gun control and liberals running our public schools are a direct attack on the Second Amendment and both need to be straightened out. Local governments have no militia to call up and the spirit of the minuteman has long faded into distant history. In colonial times the European monarchs exercised their tyranny through a large standing army and a disarmed general public. Americans viewed a strong central government and a large standing army to be recipes for a new homegrown tyranny. Our gargantuan and intrusive federal government with its huge standing army and exorbitant tax rates would certainly qualify in our founding fathers’ minds as tyrannical. Randy Weaver’s family would have their sympathy. The Swiss model of universal militia duty is much more in line with the US Constitution than is our own military. Our public schools need to teach ethics and civic duties based on Constitutional guidelines. Instead of being gun free zones, they should all have a shooting range and teach gun safety and marksmanship. Shooting should be the number one sport. It is much more important than football or basketball. After hours the ranges should be open to the public with ammo for sale dirt cheap. A law abiding citizen who carries a gun 24/7 should be seen as a responsible person. Until the civic duty of the Second Amendment is restored our freedoms will not be secured. We need to create a universal militia and the spirit of the minuteman. We need to reduce the federal government and the military.

Posted by:John ClarkAugust 17, 2007 8:17:53 PMRespond ^

It's funny that Levy says, "Who knows how many lives would have been saved [at Virginia Tech] if somebody who had a valid state-issued permit was carrying a gun and put an end to this guy?" Seems to me those lives would be just as saved if someone who chose to defy the gun laws – as many peaceful people do – were to shoot Cho.

Posted by:Anton SherwoodSeptember 14, 2007 9:12:43 PMRespond ^

Fire Arms Agency Limited Kindly view our price list for new guns below and send your inquiry to firearmsagencyltd@yahoo.co.uk Kimber Eclipse Custom II 45ACP $550USD Springfield 1911 LW Operator 45 ACP 45ACP $350 Smith & Wesson 627 PC 5" 8 Shot 357 Mag $350 E2S M4 A1 Carbine 16in. .223 $300 Kimber Custom II 45ACP/Night Sights $300 Kimber Stainless Ten II 45ACP $300 Knight Long Range Hunter 27 .52 Cal. Right-Handed Rifle $250 Knight Long Range Hunter 27 .52 Cal. Left-Handed Rifle $250 Remington 870 12 Ga 18" OD Knoxx Spec Ops Stock $200 CZ-75 Compact Black Poly 40S&W $200 Smith & Wesson 442 Airweight 38 Spl $150 Pistols: Boxed Pair George Washington Flintlock Pistols$1200 Dye DM7 Paintball Gun Clear Dust $700 DYE DM7 Paintball Marker $700 Dye DM7 Paintball Gun Red Dust $700 A cased pair of travelling pistols $800 CARBON 15 97 223 PISTOL $600USD Planet Eclipse 07 EGO Paintball Gun - Gun Metal Grey $600 06 Bob Long Infamous intimidator $400 Bob Long Ripper 2.5 Intimidator Blue $350 First Endeavor Quest Paintball Marker Olive Dust $350 Dye Matrix DMC Paintball Gun - Black $250 NEW Olympic Arms OA-93 Pistols $350 Colt .45 WWI Faithful Reproduction $300 Colt .45 WWI Faithful Reproduction $300 $300 1860 Army Revolver .44 Caliber Pistols $150 BA-6 Laser HK USP Pistols $150 Riffle Guns: 1924 Wesley Richards Riffle $1200 Marlin 30-30 $250 Price List For Pistols 1860 Army Revolver .44 Caliber Pistols: $150usd "SIG PRO 2340, 40S&W cal, VG condition.": $180usd Glock 23 - $200usd Glock 37 - .45 GAP - NEW:$250usd Bersa Thunder 9MM Pistol 13 Rd : $200usd COLT COMMANDER XSE 45 ACP STAINLESS STEEL PISTOL:$400usd BushMaster Carbon 15 9MM Pistol: $350usd RUGER 357 MAG BL 6SHOT REVOLVER: $200usd GLOCK 22 40SW 15RD FS $220usd Ruger NR5 22LR Western Revolver :$150usd WALTHER PPK/S 380ACP DA 7RD SS:$230usd BERETTA 84FS 380 10RD BLK PG:$300usd COLT 1970 GOVERNMENT COMBAT SPECIAL:$700usd COLT 1991 COMMANDER 45ACP STAINLESS STEEL:$500usd Officer's Colt Civil War Pistol with Custom Grips:$2,000. Colt 1911 MK IV, Series 80 Officers Model .45ACP:$300usd Ruger Single Six .22LR, Old Model:$150usd S&W K-38 Combat Masterpiece, model 15-3. .38 Special:$200usd Colt Detective Special .38 Special:$250usd Smith & Wesson 3913 Stainless, 9mm:$260usd SigArms P228 Nickel Slide, 9mm:$400usd

Posted by:FirearmsagencyltdOctober 28, 2007 3:58:00 PMRespond ^


McCain Campaign Screening Questioners? What's John McCain's Technology Policy? It Doesn't Exist. The MoJo Interview: David Sedaris Subprime 1-2-3		The GOP's December Surprise Shalom, Hamas Extreme Summer Camps Inappropriations: Your Tax Dollars at Rest