SUPREME COURT RULES THAT SHOOTING A PERSON OF YOUR CHOICE IS A FORM OF FREE SPEECH

by R J Shulman

WASHINGTON – (PTSD News Service) – In a split 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled today that all laws that restrict or punish someone for shooting another person are an unconstitutional infringement of protected free speech.  Echoing the Court’s reasoning in Citizens United, which held that money is speech and laws that restrict the free spending of campaign contributions are an illegal restriction of protected expression, Chief Justice John Roberts, speaking for the majority in Bang v. Vermont, threw out a state law that made it a crime to fire a bullet into another person saying, “just as this Court found that money allows someone to choose a person of their choice to push their agenda, today we rule that someone also has the right to choose a person of their choice to push up daisies.”

This ruling is a big win for gun rights advocates.  “The Second Amendment has always protected the rights of citizens to own a firearm of their choice, but what good is that if you can’t use it to shoot a person of your choice?” asked Wayne LaPierre, former President of the National Rifle Association.  “Thanks to this righteous court decision, that problem has been blown away.”

The Court did not address whether a law could be passed to punish a shooter with bad aim who misses their chosen target and hits the wrong person.  However, legal scholar Hairston Bruntlege III of the Yale University School of law said, “Logic follows that someone who shoots the wrong person is still protected by the Constitution because it is clear that a person can give vast sums of money to elect a certain candidate and later find out after that person was in office that they had supported the wrong person.”