Appeals Court Overturns D.C. Gun Ban

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by E.L., Mar 9, 2007.

  1. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal appeals court overturned the District of Columbia's long- standing handgun ban Friday, rejecting the city's argument that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applied only to militias.

    In a 2-1 decision, the judges held that the activities protected by the Second Amendment "are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued intermittent enrollment in the militia."
    A lower-court judge in 2004 had told six residents they did not have a constitutional right to own handguns. The plaintiffs include residents of high-crime neighborhoods who wanted the guns for protection.
    The Bush administration has endorsed individual gun-ownership rights, but the Supreme Court has never settled the issue. If the dispute makes it to the high court, it would be the first case in nearly 70 years to address the Second Amendment's scope.
  2. Blackjack

    Blackjack Monkey+++

    Beauti frikin utiful!
  3. GaryBrun

    GaryBrun Monkey+++

    To summarize, we conclude that the
    Second Amendment
    protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right
    existed prior to the formation of the new government under the
    Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for
    activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being
    understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the
    depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from
    abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the
    important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the
    citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient
    for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part, to
    placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right
    facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be
    barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth
    for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second
    Amendment’s civic purpose, however, the activities it protects
    are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual’s
    enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or
    intermittent enrollment in the militia.
  4. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    A bunch of fools are cheering this webwide right now. BUT, if you think the Supreme Court will be kind to the Second when it gets to them.... IMHO, the court will take the opportunity to 'further clarify' the second in regards to the definition of militia and this will open the door for us to be classified as citizen 'outside the militia'

    This is very bad news for the rest of us outside DC... IMHO

    Oh well. Party on all the way to the camp huh?!
  5. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    You may be right. But we can hope that the most recent appointments to the USSC are right thinking. We can hope that the appeals fail, that the SC won't hear the case. We can hope
  6. Blackjack

    Blackjack Monkey+++

    I was thinking that it was a victory........ [dunno] I hadn't considered that angle, but I sure hope your wrong Melbo.
  7. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    I'm not that cynical yet; I believe that just maybe we, the constitutionalists, have been fighting back against the .gov for a while now and I just don't think anyone is noticing. Even when we get a victory like in DC, the skeptics come out of the woodwork and try to minimize our victory and the worms will try every orifice to enter our apple and gnaw away at it. Look at all the states that have elected for concealed carry inspite of a growing news blitz about stronger gun control. Look at what we did to congress a few short years back in response to the assault weapons ban. Look at what we did to the GOP this year to thank them for the Patriot Act renewal? We are making an impact!
    We will rise in arms against the panty-waist Demwitocrats before we will put up with their crap; remember Zumbo. We have reached a line where we are prepared to sacrifice no more of our liberties for security, the children, the fags, or anyone else and .gov is comming to understand that if they don't get it right, then we'll tear the wall down.
    This is the america that I love and will defend!
  8. ozarkgoatman

    ozarkgoatman Resident goat herder

    Say what you will, but for me this is at least a baby step in the right direcition IMHO. [dunno]

  9. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Great post SC! [winkthumb]

    I also see this as a victory. The shot across the bow. One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.

    "Remember the Alamo!" Remember Zumbo!"
    "Remember 94'!"

    "Victory or death!"
  10. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    I suppose I'm just getting tired of listening to Us rant and rave about each encroachment without ever really doing anything about it.

    Guys are stocking up on guns and mags right now in anticipation of a new AWB. The wise men who put this whole show called the United States of America were ready and willing to die for the cause of liberty. Are you?

    That's what it really comes down to for me. If this is the most important issue you've got, are you willing to die for it. I was but am not so sure anymore. I often feel like All we have is loud words on a keyboard. I am sadly coming to the conclusion that this country is about dead and beyond revival.

    SO, I apologize for being a downer but I really and truly believe that this was a set up to get the 2nd in front of the Big Court. W is not pro gun
  11. Seawolf1090

    Seawolf1090 Retired Curmudgeonly IT Monkey Founding Member

    The Appeals Court made a good decision, BUT will the DC government rescind the ban? Lots of times, a court awards big money to a victim, but in the end, the victim gets nothing . . . hope the citizens of DC don't get the same treatment.
    This does set a good precedent, which just MIGHT get SCOTUS off their collective rumps to give a good decision on the national RKBA - something they have been reluctant to do so far.
    As mentioned though, it could backfire - if SCOTUS finds for the gun-grabbers, they'll use it to put the nails in oUR coffins.
    Could go either way - or no way, if SCOTUS remains silent. [dunno]
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary