March 2016 - Parks & Recreation - 43

B E A C O N ' S L AT E S T I N N OVAT I V E S O L U T I O N ...

PATENT PENDING

The innovative SweetSpot Tamp is a more
adaptable tool that delivers an efficient strike

800-747-5985

n Reduces or eliminates vibration

ON BU
AC

T
IL

n Interchangeable tamp heads
n Articulating tamp head

every time. This is the best tamp you'll ever buy.

The tamp reinvented.

fine violated his constitutional Second Amendment rights.
Masciandaro appealed.
Citing the " watershed " decision of the United States
Supreme Court in Dist. of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S.
570, 128 S. Ct. 2783, 171 L. Ed. 2d 637 (2008), Masciandaro claimed the Second Amendment guaranteed
him " the right to possess and carry weapons in case of
confrontation and thus protected him from prosecution
under § 2.4(b) for exercising that right in a national park
area. " In so doing, Masciandaro argued " his handgun is
the 'quintessential self-defense weapon' " and that he was
exactly the type of " law-abiding citizen " who is the primary intended beneficiary of the Second Amendment's
protections. In response, the government contended the
holding of Heller was limited to possession of a handgun
in the " home, " and, therefore, inapplicable to the circumstances to this case.
As noted by the federal appeals court, the Supreme
Court in Heller had held a law that " totally banned handgun possession in the home and prohibited rendering any
lawful firearm in the house operable for the purpose of
immediate self-defense violated the Second Amendment. "
While Heller may have established a " clearly defined fundamental right to possess firearms for self-defense within the home, " the federal appeals court acknowledged " a
considerable degree of uncertainty remains as to the scope
of that right beyond the home. " The issue was, therefore,
whether Heller necessarily invalidated a regulation that
prohibited " the possession of a loaded firearm in a motor
vehicle on National Park Service land. "
While Heller " did not define the outer limits of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, " the Supreme Court noted that " the right was not unlimited, just
as the First Amendment's right of free speech was not. "
On the contrary, the Supreme Court found the Second
Amendment right to bear arms was not " a right to keep
and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. "
Moreover, the Supreme Court in Heller noted " a majority of the 19th century courts that considered prohibitions
on carrying concealed weapons held them to be lawful
under the Second Amendment. " Similarly, in Heller, the
Supreme Court indicated it would uphold " laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as
schools and government buildings. " Accordingly, the federal appeals court would determine whether a regulation
of firearms in national parks was justified as a " sensitive
place " prohibition. The federal appeals court noted fur-

IN TH E

BeaconAthletics.com

W W W. PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N . O R G | M A R C H 2 0 1 6 |

Parks & Recreation

March 2016 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of March 2016 - Parks & Recreation