SC 5 to 4 rules in favor of gun owners!


Red Hat

New member
DC gun ban has been struck down! More to come....
 

DarrellM5

New member
Woohoo!!! That's awesome news.

It's sort of scary though, that it was a 5-4 decision. That means there are 4 Supreme Court Justices who aren't fulfilling their duties to the American people.

I've got to go research the whole decision.
 

Red Hat

New member
Woohoo!!! That's awesome news.

It's sort of scary though, that it was a 5-4 decision. That means there are 4 Supreme Court Justices who aren't fulfilling their duties to the American people.
That has been the typical vote on major cases for a long time.
 

Palmach

New member
Read the decisiion

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-290.pdf

3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to
self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban
on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an
entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the
lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny
the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this
Cite as: 554 U. S. ____ (2008) 3
Syllabus
prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense
of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional
muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the
home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible
for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and
is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument
that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily
and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy
his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement.
Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment
rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and
must issue him a license to carry it in the home. Pp. 56–64.
 
Last edited:

MrShotShot

New member
Fantastic.

Of course now we get to hear all about King George's Puppet NeoCon Court - you know, the one that gave him the election in 2000.

Funny how this same "ultraconservative" court just upheld the rights of rapists and delivered Bush a "crushing defeat" (according to CNN) with the terrorist trial ruling.
 

Red Hat

New member
First, Washington, D.C., next Chicago. Give 'em hell, NRA!

In an interview with Wayne LaPierre, NRA on FOX he said that the NRA was filing lawsuits as he spoke against Chicago, San Francisco and anywhere that our rights are being denied. Go NRA!
 

automatic slim

New member
Let us not forget............

Let us not forget that we were victorious today because of the actions of President George W. Bush, who nominated justices Roberts and Alito. Without their crucial votes this decision would have never come to pass.
Thank you Mr. President.
 

Bohemian

New member
let Us Not Forget That We Were Victorious Today Because Of The Actions Of President George W. Bush, Who Nominated Justices Roberts And Alito. Without Their Crucial Votes This Decision Would Have Never Come To Pass.
Thank You Mr. President.

way To Go "w"
 

Red Hat

New member
Let us not forget that we were victorious today because of the actions of President George W. Bush, who nominated justices Roberts and Alito. Without their crucial votes this decision would have never come to pass.
Thank you Mr. President.
Amen! Amen! Amen!
 

Bohemian

New member
Supreme Court Rules 5 to 4 in favor of gun owners

A must read...

Right To Bear Arms
By Linda Chavez
June 27, 2008

Washington, D.C., will become a safer place to live and work thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Thursday against the city's absolute ban on handguns. The Court ruled that the Second Amendment's guarantee of the right to bear arms is an individual right, not just one that permits states to maintain militias, striking down one of the nation's toughest anti-gun laws. As someone who lived in the District at the time the city imposed its ban 32 years ago, I say it's about time.

I bought my first gun in 1974 after my husband was mugged in broad daylight just blocks from the White House. My husband was picking up our 6-year-old son from school when a man approached him and demanded money. When my husband refused, the man picked up a two-by-four and hit him on the back of the head, knocking him to the ground.

The event traumatized all of us and sent me to a local gun shop to purchase a handgun. I properly registered the .357 Magnum, according to the District law in effect at the time, learned how to shoot it, and kept it safely in my home for the next two years.

But in 1976, the city changed its law, grandfathering in people like me who already owned guns, provided they bring their guns to a government building downtown to re-register them. By that time, I was pregnant with my second child. As the deadline approached, I tried a couple of times to stand in line to re-register the gun but gave up as the wait stretched into hours. On the final day, I went downtown again, gun in tow, only to see a line extending for blocks. As pregnant as I was, there was no way I could stand in line for several hours. So, I returned home, knowing my gun would be illegal if I kept it in my home.

For the next several years, I stored my gun in Virginia, where we owned a small cabin, to comply with the law. Ironically, there was no crime in the area where my cabin was located, so I had no need of the gun there. But I had several brushes with crime in D.C.

Soon after the gun ban went into effect, an intruder hid in my house one day in what was one of the most terrifying incidents in my life. I happened to see the man lurking near my staircase as I headed into the kitchen. I managed not to scream but continued walking away and quietly phoned the police. I confronted the intruder once I knew the cops were on the way. He acted as if I had somehow wronged him by calling the police but didn't stick around to explain to the authorities what he was doing in my house.

Around the same time, a serial rapist started attacking women in our neighborhood, including two women who lived within a block of my house. And even though I still owned a gun, I couldn't legally keep it nearby to protect myself. Police eventually caught the rapist, a teenager armed with a knife, but all of us in the neighborhood lived in fear for the weeks he was preying on victims.

Then, two years ago, I was again living in D.C. on Capitol Hill when I heard an awful racket through the walls of my townhouse. It sounded as if someone was being thrown down the stairs, with men shouting and doors slamming. When my husband rushed outside to see what was happening, he found our young neighbor visibly shaken. He had come home to find a man in his upstairs hallway, obviously burglarizing the house. Again, I wished I had my gun in D.C., but bringing it into the city would have made me a criminal.

These incidents were all near misses. Many other D.C. residents haven't been as lucky. They fall victim to violent crimes in their homes yet can't do anything to defend themselves.

The D.C. gun ban never made a dent in the city's gun crime; it still ranks among the most dangerous places in America. At least now, the Supreme Court has acknowledged the constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to protect their own lives when the police can't.
---
Linda Chavez is the author of "An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal."

Link Removed
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,368
Messages
622,732
Members
74,177
Latest member
gwags76
Top