Supreme Court Could Take Guns Case

#1

OrangeEmpire

The White Debonair
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
74,988
Likes
59
#1
Supreme Court Could Take Guns Case

WASHINGTON (AP) - Supreme Court justices have track records that make predicting their rulings on many topics more than a mere guess. Then there is the issue of the Second Amendment and guns, about which the court has said virtually nothing in nearly 70 years.

That could change in the next few months.
The justices are facing a decision about whether to hear an appeal from city officials in Washington, D.C., wanting to keep the capital's 31-year ban on handguns. A lower court struck down the ban as a violation of the Second Amendment rights of gun ownership.
The prospect that the high court might define gun rights under the Constitution is making people on both sides of the issue nervous.
"I wouldn't be confident on either side," said Mark Tushnet, a Harvard Law School professor and author of a new book on the battle over guns in the United States.
The court could announce as early as Tuesday whether it will hear the case.
The main issue before the justices is whether the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own guns or instead spells out the collective right of states to maintain militias. The former interpretation would permit fewer restrictions on gun ownership.
The Second Amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
The federal appeals court for the District of Columbia was the first federal panel to strike down a gun-control law based on individual rights. The court ruled in favor of Dick Anthony Heller, an armed security guard whose application to keep a handgun at home was denied by the district.
Most other U.S. courts have said the Second Amendment does not contain a right to have a gun for purely private purposes.
Chicago has a similar handgun ban, but few other gun-control laws are as strict as the district's.
Four states—Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland and New York—are urging the Supreme Court to take the case because broad application of the appeals court ruling would threaten "all federal and state laws restricting access to firearms."
The district said its law, passed in 1976, was enacted by local elected officials who believed it was a sensible way to save lives. The law also requires residents to keep shotguns and rifles unloaded and disassembled or fitted with trigger locks.
The city's appeal asks the court to look only at the handgun ban because local law allows possession of other firearms.
Critics say the law has done little to curb violence, mainly because guns obtained legally from the district or through illegal means still are readily available.
Although the city's homicide rate has declined dramatically since peaking in the early 1990s, it ranks among the nation's highest, with 169 killings in 2006.
Heller said Washington remains a dangerous place to live. "People need not stand by and die," he said in court papers.
He said the Second Amendment gives him the right to keep working guns, including handguns, in his home for his own protection.
The last time the court examined the meaning of the Second Amendment was in a 1939 case in which two men claimed the amendment gave them the right to have sawed-off shotguns. A unanimous court ruled against them.
Gun control advocates say the 1939 decision in U.S. v. Miller settled the issue in favor of a collective right. Gun rights proponents say the decision has been misconstrued.
Chief Justice John Roberts has said the question has not been resolved by the Supreme Court. The 1939 decision "sidestepped" the issue of whether the Second Amendment right is individual or collective, Roberts said at his confirmation hearing in 2005.
"That's still very much an open issue," Roberts said.
Both the district government and Heller want the high court to take the case. The split among the appeals courts and the importance of the issue make it likely that the justices will do so, Tushnet said.
The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.

Thoughts?
 
#2
#2
there are plenty of guns in Washington D.C. right now. The problem is who has them.
 
#4
#4
It seems like a good gun debate pops around every now and again.

I remember when I lived in Lexington, Kentucky about 10 years ago I had some "friends" who thought the government was going to take their guns by coming door to door so they were thinking of ways to bury their guns in the ground so a metal detector would not be able to locate them.
 
#5
#5
This is why we needed the Second Amendment...

Houston shootout sequence unclear : Houston-Brothers : Knoxville News Sentinel

KINGSTON — After a daylong hearing Thursday for two brothers accused in the fatal shooting of a Roane County lawman and his ride-along, this much is clear:

Someone opened fire on May 11, 2006, with murderous intent. Someone else returned fire to save himself and his sidekick.

Authorities have long said it was brothers Rocky Joe Houston and Clifford Leon Houston who ambushed Roane County Sheriff’s Office Deputy William Birl Jones and his ride-along, Gerald Michael Brown.

But testimony at a preliminary hearing in Roane County General Sessions Court left even a judge wondering just who ambushed who.

Who's word are you gonna believe? The citizen or the sheriff?
 
#6
#6
Oh how big this case would be. Will it also define background checks, waiting periods, automatic weapons bans, etc? One reason the SCOTUS has avoided this issue is because the Third Rail dynamic in legal terms. Either they pass on this or they have to strictly define this or risk just opening up all sorts of wiggle room with interpretations. And just in time for the '08 election....someone's timing is impeccable.
 
#7
#7
This is why we needed the Second Amendment...

Houston shootout sequence unclear : Houston-Brothers : Knoxville News Sentinel



Who's word are you gonna believe? The citizen or the sheriff?

I don't see this as a strong argument for the Second Amendment if you believe the sheriff. If you believe the citizen, then yeah it's probably a good thing he was able to fire back. A good question is, however, what the heck did that guy need with an AK-47 semi-automatic?
 
#10
#10
Can't wait to see how this comes out. Now we'll see if the 'strict constructionists' are truly that.
 
#11
#11
I'm not sure who this would help cspin. I am looking forward to the footage of Hillary's dove hunt next September.
 
#12
#12
Well first of all not all guns are banned under this law. Second of all, DC is and has always been treated very differently from the states. So the interpretation of the Constitution will be interesting to see coming from this Court.
 
#13
#13
there are plenty of guns in Washington D.C. right now. The problem is who has them.

EXACTLY!!!! How many gang members go to the local sport shop and buy a pistol on the books? I don't, however, think that those not familiar with guns will ever understand that stripping citizens of their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms will not keep the guns responsible for the inner city shootings off the street.

It's like Schumer and the other morons think playing "Lets Make a Law" will change things.
 
#14
#14
They can still own rifles and shotguns. It's not like ALL guns are prohibited.

Keep in mind the SCOTUS has never really settled the whole "militia vs citizens' right to bear arms" debate. Plus DC is in a whole category in itself beyond what everyone else has rights to.
 
#15
#15
They can still own rifles and shotguns. It's not like ALL guns are prohibited.

Keep in mind the SCOTUS has never really settled the whole "militia vs citizens' right to bear arms" debate. Plus DC is in a whole category in itself beyond what everyone else has rights to.

And a Handgun is more dangerous in a drive by than a long gun? Quite the opposite. Why are Handguns worse?
 
#16
#16
Compare numbers of driveby's to numbers of robberies and murders. What are typically used in those crimes? What are easier to conceal?

Don't shoot the messenger. Just pointing out some facts.
 

VN Store



Back
Top