Constitution vs Constitution, proud of my wife

[Sky King]

My wife was summoned for Federal Jury Duty for the month of June. I don't know how it works in other locations, but here in Memphis, if you are called for Federal jury duty, you have to call in every evening to see if you are expected to report the next day. Well my wife was instructed to report for duty on Tuesday, the 7th of June.

I don't know the details of the case but she was in the second group in the jury box to be questioned to see if she would be seated. Apparently the defendant was charged with some form of a firearms violation.

As we all know, a jury trial is a right we all have that is mandated by our Consitution. In as much, serving on a jury is something we all usually do not look forward to but as a Constitutionally protected right, it is a duty we should all respond to when asked. But in the case involving my wife, her "fitness" to serve came head to head with another of our fundamental rights protected in The Bill of Rights, namely, The Second Amendment.

After being called into the jury box, the prosecuting deputy federal attorney asked if anybody or their family owned guns. Needless to say, my wife answered "yes". She was further questioned about just who owned the guns, how many, what type, (handguns, rifles shotguns) and why. My wife stated that the guns were mine and that I owned a few handguns and a couple of rifles but was not sure of the exact details of what they were. When asked why or what purpose I owned these guns, my wife responded that the were for personal protection. When the prospective jurors were asked if anyone had any concerns, my wife raised her hand and made a statement in support of our Second Amendment rights saying that she felt it was a right that is being infringed upon at every turn and that law abiding citizens should have an unquestioned right to own, keep and bear arms.

She was dismissed.

I told her that I was proud of her for taking the stand she took. What I find upsetting is that because a law abiding person takes a public stance in SUPPORT of a right protected by our Constitution, she is deemed unfit to fullfill a duty that is ALSO protected by our Constitution.

I ask all of you here, what is wrong with this picturre?

[benburke]

The story you told, the picture you created, does not surprise me. What is wrong with the picture? We are doing an awful job in educating Americans on the importance of the Second Amendment! It is estimated that between forty and fifty percent of Americans own guns. That would be well over 100 million Americans. Why is the NRA membership only 3 million? I know. I know. A lot of TFA members have issues with the NRA, and I agree with some of those issues. However, the strength of the NRA is in their members. How much better would our laws (federal and state) be if the NRA membership was 50 million? 60 million? 75 million? Educate! Educate! Educate!

[benburke]

Oh, and thank your wife for me, for the answer she gave! You should be well pleased with her!

[1gewehr]

Of course I would have a difficult time regarding a jury composed of people who do not own guns as being my 'peers'. If a person does not have the ability to uphold their responsibility to defend their family and community, they can hardly be regarded as a fit member on a firearms-related jury!

[SomeGuy]

The other troubling part is the personal questions regarding who owns exactly what.