Awesome. This is a pivotal decision as it establishes the 2nd as an individual, not a collective, right. Fiften minutes after the ruling was announced a suit was filed against Chicago.
This is great news, but it also points out how lucky we were to have had Bush appointing Supreme Court Justices the last 8 years instead of Gore and Kerry.
It also points out how tenuous our Constitutional rights are and just how much damage could be done if Obama gets to appoint Justices.
Some of the things coming out of Washington just leave me dumbfounded. The following dissent by Breyer is a real jewel.
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."
So you have no constitutional right to protect yourself, your family or home even though you may live in a crime ridden neighborhood. And to think, we pay him almost 200K/yr for those words of wisdom.
We aren't out of the woods net....not for many generations... Notice how Scalia & Co. respected the wishes of the DoJ and left the door wide open for "resonable" regulation. Basically, the whole ruling is summed up by: Banning weapons that are 'in common use' (i.e. weapons that aren't banned) is a big no-no. Banning weapons that are believed to be 'military only' (a.k.a 'assault rilfles') is peachy keen.
So sure, you can own a handgun, a bolt action sporting rifle, a shotgun, but not an AR-15? What about an AK47 or an SKS?
Yeah, we a small battle, we haven't won the war.
What has yet to be decided is if "reasonable restrictions" can include banning of semi-auto rifles and handguns, magazine capacity limits, "sniper rifles", etc. In this respect the ruling does little to help us. The way I read it, a state could ban everything but single shot .22 LR handguns and rifles and still be within the limits of this ruling.
It will take DC, SF or Chicago passing some goofy law saying you can only own a single shot .22 handgun and someone getting pinched with a 9mm then taking it back to the SCOTUS to get a ruling. That means sometime by the time my son is 40 years old we might get another more meaningful ruling.
Last edited by Full-Auto; 06-27-2008 at 08:26 AM.
Although I think that's a poor strategy. The NRA should have asked a town to enact a gun ban exactly mirroring the DC gun ban, so that the only issue before the Supreme Court would be incorporation of the 2nd amendment. Otherwise, the Court might find some way to distinguish a San Francisco or Chicago case from Heller, leaving us back where we started.
Of course, that's legal strategy, and sometimes you don't always get what you want.
Gun ruling galvanizes groups -- NRA to target other city laws; foes vow to boost resistance
Within minutes of the Supreme Court ruling overturning the District's gun ban, leaders of the National Rifle Association began work on legal challenges against gun restrictions in Chicago and San Francisco, while gun-control groups said the decision would only strengthen their efforts.
Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which fought in support of the city's handgun ban, predicted that the decision would "embolden criminal defendants, and ideological extremists, to file new legal attacks on existing gun laws." "
With the help of the Brady Center's legal team, those attacks can, and must, be successfully resisted in the interest of public safety," he said.
The NRA and Gun Owners of America both say they're planning to use the ruling as a springboard to challenge state and local laws across the country.
"Certainly things like the Chicago handgun ban, which is very similar to what Washington, D.C., had, those are the kind of things we would want to look at," said Erich Pratt, a spokesman for Gun Owners of America. "We're definitely going to be in the middle of all of that."
Mr. Pratt also noted comments by Justice Stephen G. Breyer that the decision "threatens to throw into doubt the constitutionality of gun laws throughout the United States."
"When Justice Breyer is sad, we're happy," Mr. Pratt said.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|