Discussion in 'Firearms' started by Clyde, Jun 25, 2008.
Apparently, NRA has filed suits against Chicago and SF under the same grounds..
Schools were specificaly menationed along with government buildings as sensitive areas.
I absolutely loved the way Scalia kept riping on Stevens (was more patient with the othe justice to write decent and simply corrected his errors) throughout his opinion. 'grotesque', 'irrelevent', 'flat wrong', 'inconcievable' he wasnt EVEN nice to Stevens and supported the majority opinion with citations all the way from pre-colonial through 1900's.
It may have left some holes for the enemy to probe but it absolutely left more opening I could see for us to probe to dust off the already standing infringments on the 2A. In fact useing his own arguments and simply adding a bit more of the quotes used to support them reguarding early militia(clearly defined in the opinion as all able citizens) being required to have arms of the type commonly use (IIRC that originaly went on to say 'in military use' or some such) and the use of Miller as a reference by both side it could easily create justification for why it extends to our right to have any small arms commonly issued to the military.
Long but VERY cool reading.
SHWEETT, now let the avalanch fall on them and get rid of more of the garbage.
As of when this is written, the Wall Street Journal poll shows 81% agree with the Court that ownership is an individual right. The rest disagree, and don't know was not an option.
"Eighty people a day die at the hands of guns. We have got to stop that. The court clearly ruled that reasonable regulations are permitted under that decision."
- New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg
How many of those eighty die because they need killing? How many die that are criminals? How many kill that are law-abiding citizens other than in defense of their life and property? What a dick-head.
Every time he opens his mouth, one is tempted to call an elephant to plug it with something distasteful. "--at the hands of guns"? WTF,O?
Wait.... guns have hands?
The good mayor said so, so it must be true. After all he was elected for his wisdom, not so?
Oh even better the mayor of DC is STILL trying to get around it and has stated that the LEOs have 21 days to lisence/register guns in DC AND that semiauto handguns will NOT be allowed in DC, only revolvers. Talk about a morinc ass hat!!! Just got whooped and now needs to be spanked again before the smoke even clears from his first lesson. I just hope he is privatly/personaly sued for deprivation of civil rights (can be held PERSONALY liable for that and the office dont have to cover it) since that is now unequivacably a constitutional/civil right and he is choosing to deny it to the residents. So sue him and any officers or personel that go along with it PERSONALY rather than the offices they work for and take their private homes and pentions and saveings and see if they and their fellow ass hats figure it out.
What was left out of this article is that they did not protect the right to not infringe and although people have the right to bear arms they decided that it should be balanced with whatever they seem reasonable. They decided that their is a right on behalf of the government to regulate and license gun owners however they seem fit. The anti-gun declares this a win for them because they intend to increase restrictions on the average gun owner such as a license requirement program to own a gun and more stringent background check laws and requirements. This will eliminate a lot of current gun owners
and create a lot of hoops to jump through just to own a gun. When their finished only a select few will be able to own a gun, just like old Mayor Guilani's CCW requirements he had in NYC, It was almost impossible for anyone to get their CCW and only a select few had theirs.
I left nothing out of the article it is in its entirety as i found it. I'm not sure if i like you implying i Left some out. BTW if you make this assertion i did this, then you left out the whole thing with yours....
OK.... reading this makes me realize a couple things. Firstly is how just one appointee to the court from "Barry" could have killed our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. That was some scary shit that 4 of those little socialista bestards went against the Bill Of Rights. Shows to go ya why the Founders drew up such a comprehensive Bill.
Secondly, as far as I can see it seems the Court validated Miller's Case and leaves a GAPING HOLE for further litigation regarding the whole '34 ban, not to mention the "86 ban. They basically said that you should have the right to own any military weapon that is in common use. Not a Nuke, or a ballistic missle, just an arm that would be carried as an avg. infantryman. All this sporting qualification shit is going to be HISTORY upon further litigation. Can you say imported assault rifles again.
That being said, this is going to take years and a McCain in the White House to appoint maybe one or two Justices so that we can keep this train rollin'.
Separate names with a comma.