PDA

View Full Version : SCOTUS: 2nd Amend Applies To Entire US



Apocalypse
06-28-2010, 11:27 PM
http://photos.smugmug.com/photos/916550177_585JX-O.jpg


Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

By Mark Sherman, Associated Press Writer

June 28, 2010

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court held Monday that the Constitution’s Second Amendment restrains government’s ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms," advancing a recent trend by the John Roberts-led bench to embrace gun rights.

By a narrow, 5-4 vote, the justices also signaled, however, that some limitations on the right could survive legal challenges.

Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right "applies equally to the federal government and the states."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_supreme_court_guns

Countdown to DU meltdown......

Rockntractor
06-28-2010, 11:31 PM
I just went out and fired a 535 grain. semi spitzer in celebration!

Dan D. Doty
06-29-2010, 12:54 AM
Rock, tell me you didn't do it on front lawn :cool:

NJCardFan
06-29-2010, 01:45 AM
Talk about a big kick in the balls to the left.

RobJohnson
06-29-2010, 04:41 AM
Great news & a great start to allow Chicago residents the protection of having a handgun in the home!

Odysseus
06-29-2010, 11:24 AM
Wait a minute! Did the SCOTUS state that the Bill of Rights applies to all Americans? Everywhere in America? Why, that's just the sort of radical, reactionary thinking that Obama was elected to stop. :D

AmPat
06-29-2010, 11:49 AM
5 to 4. :mad:

If Comrade Kagin is confirmed, we are doomed. Just look at the lying bag of wind Sotomajor. She lied to get confirmed. Pieces of crap, every single liberal is a lying piece of feces.

fettpett
06-29-2010, 12:21 PM
5 to 4. :mad:

If Comrade Kagin is confirmed, we are doomed. Just look at the lying bag of wind Sotomajor. She lied to get confirmed. Pieces of crap, every single liberal is a lying piece of feces.

it was 5-4, but Steven's vote was part of the dissent. so it wont matter. Fortunately we've had 2 liberals retire and none of the conservatives. now....if Ginsberg holds on till after 2012, we'll be good :D

AmPat
06-29-2010, 02:16 PM
it was 5-4, but Steven's vote was part of the dissent. so it wont matter. Fortunately we've had 2 liberals retire and none of the conservatives. now....if Ginsberg holds on till after 2012, we'll be good :D

If they had an ounce of decency and love of Country and Constitution, the vote would have been 9-0.

malloc
06-29-2010, 02:36 PM
While I still mark this one in the win column, here comes Chicago obstruction.



The expected narrowness of the court's decision today had already encouraged Mayor Richard Daley and the city of Chicago to threaten last week to effectively undo the Supreme Court decision with new regulations.

Daley promised to quickly adopt all the regulations that Washington adopted in 2008 after its gun ban was struck down, as well as some additional ones. To get a handgun permit in Washington, applicants must pay fees over $550, make four trips to the police station, and take two different tests.

Taking the court's 2008 decision that all handguns can't be banned, Washington went so far as to still ban all semi-automatic handguns that can hold a clip. Chicago plans on doing the same but adding a requirement that gun owners buy insurance that covers any incidents that might arise from the weapon.


From: Court's Gun Decision An Important Win for Americans Who Want to Defend Themselves (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/06/28/john-lott-supreme-court-guns-ban-washington-chicago-daley-kagan-sotomayor/)

This is just plain stupid. Despite D.C.'s obstruction to the decision, look at what has happened in D.C. from the same article:



Comparing Washington’s crime rates from January 1 to June 17 of this year to the same period in 2008, shows a 34 percent drop in murder. This drop puts D.C.'s murder rate back to where it was before the 1977 handgun ban. Indeed, the murder rate is as low as was before 1967.

Other gun crimes have also fallen in Washington. While robberies without guns fell by 7 percent, robberies with gun fell by over 14 percent. Assaults with weapons other than guns fell by 7, but assaults using guns fell by over 20 percent.

Maybe all those studies, both private and Congress initiated, which proved that more guns equates to less crime were correct after all?

The case I'm waiting for is the case which strikes down the permit process. If owning and bearing (i.e. carrying) a firearm is an individual right, then the right is on equal footing with other individual rights such as free speech, religion, etc. If that is the case, then I don't need a permit to speak freely, and I don't need a permit to join a religion. Why would I need a permit to own and carry a firearm?

lacarnut
06-29-2010, 03:31 PM
If they had an ounce of decency and love of Country and Constitution, the vote would have been 9-0.

It is pretty pathetic that 4 left wing ideologue justices voted against the constitution.

m00
06-29-2010, 03:36 PM
The case I'm waiting for is the case which strikes down the permit process. If owning and bearing (i.e. carrying) a firearm is an individual right, then the right is on equal footing with other individual rights such as free speech, religion, etc. If that is the case, then I don't need a permit to speak freely, and I don't need a permit to join a religion. Why would I need a permit to own and carry a firearm?

Be careful. With that logic, government will say "you're right!" and require permits for approved speech and authorized religions.

malloc
06-29-2010, 03:54 PM
Be careful. With that logic, government will say "you're right!" and require permits for approved speech and authorized religions.

You know, it wouldn't surprise me. I'm not too worried about it as I live in a state that as of July 28th will no longer require a permit to carry concealed, and already allows for open carry. I just hate that I can't travel and carry at the same time.

Chuck58
06-29-2010, 11:18 PM
You know, it wouldn't surprise me. I'm not too worried about it as I live in a state that as of July 28th will no longer require a permit to carry concealed, and already allows for open carry. I just hate that I can't travel and carry at the same time.

I carry everywehre. My wife's relatives are mostly in Maine and NH. I have my P7 in the glovebox or center console when we make the trip from NM. I don't worry while following I-40 through the South. I admit I start getting nervous when we come out of Virginia or WV and hit Pennsylvania.

I really get nervous when we go into Conn and Mass. Fortunately they're little states.

I'm damned, though, if I'm going to go on a 2200 mile or more trip unarmed. The worst of the trip, from a Rights standpoint, is lower New England, and we can get through those dwarf states in a few hours.

KhrushchevsShoe
06-30-2010, 09:03 AM
I thought you guys were all about states' rights? What happened?

Rockntractor
06-30-2010, 09:06 AM
I thought you guys were all about states' rights? What happened?

The day that the second amendment is no more we will no longer have states rights. You don't pick and choose which part of the constitution to abide by, you take it as a whole.

noonwitch
06-30-2010, 09:31 AM
Talk about a big kick in the balls to the left.



It shouldn't be, though. There are plenty of gun owners on the left.

Coleman Young, mayor of Detroit from the 70s until the early 90s, was a lot of things, but a liberal, through and through. He always opposed having stricter gun control laws in the city than in the rest of the state, despite Detroit's crime rate, and maybe even because of it. He packed heat, and he knew a lot of his citizens did so, also.

Odysseus
06-30-2010, 09:35 AM
I thought you guys were all about states' rights? What happened?

No, we are about the rule of law. All American citizens have rights which are explicitly stated in the Constitution, as well as rights which are implied and rights which are guaranteed because they are not mentioned, and which cannot be nullified by the states. The There are certainly States' Rights, which are explicitly guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment, but which are limited under the Privileges and Immunities clause of the US Constitution. Second Amendment explicitly enumerates an individual right to keep and bear arms. If a state can nullify that, then it can nullify the explicit rights to free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom from warrantless searches, etc.

OTOH, you guys are supposed to be about individual rights. Doesn't self-defense count as a right?

noonwitch
06-30-2010, 03:43 PM
No, we are about the rule of law. All American citizens have rights which are explicitly stated in the Constitution, as well as rights which are implied and rights which are guaranteed because they are not mentioned, and which cannot be nullified by the states. The There are certainly States' Rights, which are explicitly guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment, but which are limited under the Privileges and Immunities clause of the US Constitution. Second Amendment explicitly enumerates an individual right to keep and bear arms. If a state can nullify that, then it can nullify the explicit rights to free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom from warrantless searches, etc.

OTOH, you guys are supposed to be about individual rights. Doesn't self-defense count as a right?


It does in my book, and I'm a liberal. I'm not a gun owner, myself, but I will defend any other law-abiding citizen's right to bear arms. Besides, I live in a large, urban area, and I work in a job that pisses people off. If I ever see one of my adult clients on my porch, well, I'll probably buy a gun at that point. If that day comes, it's good to know that I can go to the gun store and get one.

Odysseus
06-30-2010, 05:22 PM
It does in my book, and I'm a liberal. I'm not a gun owner, myself, but I will defend any other law-abiding citizen's right to bear arms. Besides, I live in a large, urban area, and I work in a job that pisses people off. If I ever see one of my adult clients on my porch, well, I'll probably buy a gun at that point. If that day comes, it's good to know that I can go to the gun store and get one.

Well, you can get one under Michigan law, but only after you get a license. MCL 28.422 requires that a person "shall not purchase, carry, or transport a pistol in this state without first having obtained a license for the pistol." These licenses are issued by the local police or, if the town doesn't have it's own police, then by the county sheriff. After you've waited the mandatory however long that takes, made sure that your permits are in order and ingratiated yourself to the local PD, you may have that gun in time for your Next of Kin to avenge you.

Lager
06-30-2010, 09:10 PM
I thought you guys were all about states' rights? What happened?

The states have the right to attempt to repeal the 2nd amendment if 3/4ths of all of them vote to do so. That about sums up their rights in this case.

fettpett
06-30-2010, 09:29 PM
Well, you can get one under Michigan law, but only after you get a license. MCL 28.422 requires that a person "shall not purchase, carry, or transport a pistol in this state without first having obtained a license for the pistol." These licenses are issued by the local police or, if the town doesn't have it's own police, then by the county sheriff. After you've waited the mandatory however long that takes, made sure that your permits are in order and ingratiated yourself to the local PD, you may have that gun in time for your Next of Kin to avenge you.

there are actually 2 bills going through Lansing right now:
* HB 5972 of 2010
Weapons; licensing; requirement for purchase permit with every new pistol purchase; eliminate, and provide procedures for registration of pistols. Amends secs. 1, 2 & 2b of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.421 et seq.). TIE BAR WITH: HB 5973'10
Last Action: 3/18/2010 referred to Committee on Tourism, Outdoor Recreation and Natural Resources
* HB 5973 of 2010
Weapons; licensing; requirement for purchase permit with every new pistol purchase; eliminate, and provide procedures for registration of pistols. Amends secs. 5l, 9a, 9b & 9c of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.425l et seq.) & repeals sec. 2a of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.422a). TIE BAR WITH: HB 5972'10
Last Action: 3/18/2010 referred to Committee on Tourism, Outdoor Recreation and Natural Resources

Right now all you need to get a handgun in MI is the purchase permit. It's a pain, but much easier than it use to be. Use to have to take your gun in for a "safety" check (read underhand registration)

warpig
06-30-2010, 10:28 PM
The sad part of this is the vote was 5-4. It should have been 9-0.

noonwitch
07-01-2010, 08:51 AM
Well, you can get one under Michigan law, but only after you get a license. MCL 28.422 requires that a person "shall not purchase, carry, or transport a pistol in this state without first having obtained a license for the pistol." These licenses are issued by the local police or, if the town doesn't have it's own police, then by the county sheriff. After you've waited the mandatory however long that takes, made sure that your permits are in order and ingratiated yourself to the local PD, you may have that gun in time for your Next of Kin to avenge you.



I don't need a permit for a shotgun, at least that's what several people have told me.


But there's no way I wouldn't qualify for a gun license under Michigan Law. I have no criminal record. My job may even qualify me for a CCW, providing I complete the required course that I can take at many different locations throughout the metro Detroit area.


At least I know where to post for gun advice, should I decide to get one:).

lacarnut
07-01-2010, 09:32 AM
The day that the second amendment is no more we will no longer have states rights. You don't pick and choose which part of the constitution to abide by, you take it as a whole.

Liberal hacks do not understand that concept.

Molon Labe
07-01-2010, 10:37 AM
I thought you guys were all about states' rights? What happened?

Satanica?

Odysseus
07-01-2010, 12:28 PM
I don't need a permit for a shotgun, at least that's what several people have told me.

But there's no way I wouldn't qualify for a gun license under Michigan Law. I have no criminal record. My job may even qualify me for a CCW, providing I complete the required course that I can take at many different locations throughout the metro Detroit area.

At least I know where to post for gun advice, should I decide to get one:).

That you do. :D

And the first piece of advice that I can give you is that when you see one of your clients on your doorstep, it's too late. Also, the NRA has a superb pistol instruction course. I took the instructors' course and teach it to my troops in addition to the Army's Pre-Marksmanship Training, and I've never had a shooter fail to qualify after I've coached them (and considering some of the loggies that I've had to coach, that's actually rather impressive). Even if you don't buy a gun, you can take the course and shoot rentals at a range, so that you have the skill when you need it.

Bubba Dawg
07-01-2010, 08:23 PM
I just went out and fired a 535 grain. semi spitzer in celebration!

Had he worked for you long? :(

Bet you wouldn't have fired him if he had been a full-blooded Spitzer. :p

Odysseus
07-02-2010, 03:01 PM
Had he worked for you long? :(

Bet you wouldn't have fired him if he had been a full-blooded Spitzer. :p

Naw, Elliot would've been impeached for the whole hooker thing anyway. :D

Big Guy
07-02-2010, 07:07 PM
there are actually 2 bills going through Lansing right now:
* HB 5972 of 2010
Weapons; licensing; requirement for purchase permit with every new pistol purchase; eliminate, and provide procedures for registration of pistols. Amends secs. 1, 2 & 2b of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.421 et seq.). TIE BAR WITH: HB 5973'10
Last Action: 3/18/2010 referred to Committee on Tourism, Outdoor Recreation and Natural Resources
* HB 5973 of 2010
Weapons; licensing; requirement for purchase permit with every new pistol purchase; eliminate, and provide procedures for registration of pistols. Amends secs. 5l, 9a, 9b & 9c of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.425l et seq.) & repeals sec. 2a of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.422a). TIE BAR WITH: HB 5972'10
Last Action: 3/18/2010 referred to Committee on Tourism, Outdoor Recreation and Natural Resources

Right now all you need to get a handgun in MI is the purchase permit. It's a pain, but much easier than it use to be. Use to have to take your gun in for a "safety" check (read underhand registration)

I gave my Dad a Browning 9mm High Power a couple weeks ago, he lives in Hale, MI. He took it back up to get it registered, they won't register it and now I have to drive all the way up there to get it back before they confiscate it.

He has a carry permit that is completely useless, because I can't give my own father a gun without permission first. Yet another reason for me to stay in Tennessee.

fettpett
07-03-2010, 04:49 PM
I gave my Dad a Browning 9mm High Power a couple weeks ago, he lives in Hale, MI. He took it back up to get it registered, they won't register it and now I have to drive all the way up there to get it back before they confiscate it.

He has a carry permit that is completely useless, because I can't give my own father a gun without permission first. Yet another reason for me to stay in Tennessee.

I believe in MI that second hand sales are handled differently, but all you should have to do is go get the purchase permit and have the seller fill them out.

However you're from out of state and not selling the weapon. That is probably why he couldn't get it done, as they are pretty anal about selling across borders.