The Supreme Court decision which opened the door to allow almost any American to own firearms specifically stated that the Second Amendment does not prohibit laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places.

In the District of Columbia vs. Heller in 2008, the court ruled 5-4 that citizens have the right to possess firearms even when not in a state militia, and people can use them for lawful purposes, which include self-defense in their homes, according to Britannica.com.

Using that backdrop, an armed caravan driving into the center of Portland to confront a group of protesters with whom they strongly disagree should have been disarmed by the police.

The court referred to schools and government buildings as examples of sensitive places but it is hard to imagine any place more sensitive than a protest line being openly challenged by a caravan of armed counter-protesters.

We have seen twice in less than a week that the presence of gun-toting vigilantes has resulted in unnecessary deaths during protests that were against unnecessary deaths.

Defending ones homes with lethal force is legal. Racing to a protest with ones personal armory is ridiculous, often dangerous and in no way defendable.

Police departments should bar firearms in any future similar situations.

Here is the original post:

Our view: Heller ruling could be used in 'sensitive' locations - Journal Inquirer