SCOTUS agrees to rule on gun case


CA CCWInstructor

New member
Court agrees to rule on gun case
Tuesday, November 20th, 2007 1:02 pm | Lyle Denniston | Comment (1) | Print This Post
Email this • Share on Facebook • Digg This!

After a hiatus of 68 years, the Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to rule on the meaning of the Second Amendment — the hotly contested part of the Constitution that guarantees “a right to keep and bear arms.” Not since 1939 has the Court heard a case directly testing the Amendment’s scope — and there is a debate about whether it actually decided anything in that earlier ruling. In a sense, the Court may well be writing on a clean slate if, in the end, it decides the ultimate question: does the Second Amendment guarantee an individual right to have a gun for private use, or does it only guarantee a collective right to have guns in an organized military force such as a state National Guard unit?

The city of Washington’s appeal (District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290) is expected to be heard in March — slightly more than a year after the D.C. Circuit Court ruled that the right is a personal one, at least to have a gun for self-defense in one’s own home.

The Justices chose to write out for themselves the question they will undertake to answer. Both sides had urged the Court to hear the city’s case, but they had disagreed over how to frame the Second Amendment issue.

Here is the way the Court phrased the granted issue:

“Whether the following provisions — D.C. Code secs. 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02 — violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?”

The first listed section bars registration of pistols if not registered before Sept. 24, 1976; the second bars carrying an unlicensed pistol, and the third requires that any gun kept at home must be unloaded and disassembled or bound by a lock, such as one that prevents the trigger from operating.
 

Sgt. SIG

New member
Man, it seem obvious to most of us how this ruling should go but what if... NO, I CAN'T EVEN SAY IT! :eek:
 

Ektarr

Dedicated Infidel
To alla you legal-beagles: Help a brother out here...

Am I correct that this case will address whether the people of D.C. are entitlted to have a gun in their homes? Or will this decision, in fact, address the larger question of whether 2A provides for the individual citizen's Right to possess and carry a concealed weapon in the USA?

Seems to me, without the benefit of actual brains in this department, that the question on the table addresses the D.C. issue only.

Am I wrong? (Please say 'yes'!)
 

DrDavidM

New member
It seems you are correct. Hopefully ,it will go our way and set a precedent however.

The court said yesterday it will limit its ruling to one question: whether D.C. laws "violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes."

Link Removed
 

CA CCWInstructor

New member
This case is going to deal with the ownership question only. It could help us for future cases dealing with carry. To have SCOTUS agree with 2A would be a huge step.

Getting SCOTUS to deal with a CCW case would be a uphill battle. If they were to look at the spirit it was written in at that time, we would lose. After all, back then only "Cowards" carried concealed. That can be easly proven by any historian.

YMMV
 

ishi

New member
Getting SCOTUS to deal with a CCW case would be a uphill battle. If they were to look at the spirit it was written in at that time, we would lose. After all, back then only "Cowards" carried concealed. That can be easly proven by any historian.

I don't know that there were any easily concealable firearms when the constitution was ratified. The one-shot pistols of the day were very large, were they not? They certainly were out of the price range of any normal person.

Knives would likely have been the choice of concealed weaponry at the time.
 

Ektarr

Dedicated Infidel
I don't know if they even made a distinction between 'concealed' and 'open' carry. I think 'armed' was armed and that was that . . . how you chose to carry was more than likely a decision based upon what you had, what you were wearing and how you wanted to present yourself.

One man's opinion.
 

Ektarr

Dedicated Infidel
Interestingly, this seems to take a different view of the potential. I certainly hope SCOTUS takes a more National view of the situation and doesn't limit themselves to one narrow situation...or at least that that narrow view has National implications!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


NEWS RELEASE
SAF EXCITED ABOUT SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF HELLER CASE
BELLEVUE, WA – For the first time in United States history, the Supreme Court will hear a case that should, once and for all, decide the meaning of the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights, and the Second Amendment Foundation could not be happier.

“We are confident that the high court will rule that the Second Amendment affirms and protects an individual civil right to keep and bear arms,” said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb. “Previous Supreme Court rulings dating back more than a century have consistently referred to the Second Amendment as protective of an individual right, but the case of District of Columbia v. Heller focuses on that issue, and we expect the court to settle the issue once and for all.”

The court announced today that it will hear an appeal of the case, in which seven Washington, D.C. residents have sued to overturn the district’s 31-year-old gun ban. In March, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the ban is unconstitutional because it violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The court further ruled that the amendment does protect an individual right. The ruling set off a firestorm, in which gun control proponents, who had frequently claimed to support a right to keep and bear arms, dropped all pretenses and publicly acknowledged that they do not believe there is such a right protected by the Second Amendment.

“An affirmative ruling by the Supreme Court will probably not be the death knell for the extremist citizen disarmament movement,” Gottlieb said, “but it will properly cripple their campaign to destroy an important civil right, the one that protects all of our other rights. The insidious effort to strip American citizens of their firearms rights, while at the same time permanently harming public safety must end.

“The Washington, D.C. gun ban has been a monumental failure and the crime statistics prove that,” Gottlieb said. “For almost 70 years, gun banners have deliberately misinterpreted and misrepresented the high court’s language in the U.S. v Miller ruling in 1939. It is long past the time that this important issue be put to rest, and the Heller case will provide the court with that opportunity.”

-END-
 

NDS

New member
If SCOTUS would agree that Americans have the right to carry as they wish, CCW becomes less or an issue. When I lived in AZ open carry was always an option and drew little attention. Maybe towns would adopt a 'no open carry' law requiring people to conceal their legally carried sidearm so as to calm the sheeple.




This case is going to deal with the ownership question only. It could help us for future cases dealing with carry. To have SCOTUS agree with 2A would be a huge step.

Getting SCOTUS to deal with a CCW case would be a uphill battle. If they were to look at the spirit it was written in at that time, we would lose. After all, back then only "Cowards" carried concealed. That can be easly proven by any historian.

YMMV
 

DrLewall

Charter Member
:cool: "any gun kept at home must be unloaded and disassembled or bound by a lock, such as one that prevents the trigger from operating."

Might as well remove all locks from the doors and windows and put out a Welcome mat...I just HATE stupid laws!
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,394
Messages
623,171
Members
74,219
Latest member
Beto7YT
Top