2nd Ammendment Upheld!!

[Roger]

US News & World Report:

The Supreme Court Rules That the Second Amendment Means What It Says
June 27, 2008 01:38 PM ET | Michael Barone | Permanent Link


The Supreme Court on June 26 ruled that the Second Amendment to the Constitution confers, as it says, a right to keep and bear arms and that the District of Columbia law effectively prohibiting the possession of handguns by most citizens is unconstitutional. I've written on this issue in a column that appeared shortly after the Virginia Tech massacre, in this blog twice. In the column I noted Judge Laurence Silberman's strong opinion in the D.C. Circuit, which the Supreme Court has just affirmed, and went on:

Limited regulation is allowed, Silberman wrote, but not a total ban. Somewhere on the road between a law banning possession of nuclear weapons and banning all guns, the Second Amendment stands in the way. This is the view as well of the liberal constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe.


God I am so thrilled!!!

[sarah]

"Notable gun banner, Dianne Feinstein, was equally upset, saying she was "profoundly disappointed" in the Court decision."

Let's get our rights into the National Parks as well.
http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/a...344046&type=CO

[RAT]

The law suits have only just begun. San Francisco is gonna be ground zero pretty soon.

[Roger]

The law suits have only just begun. San Francisco is gonna be ground zero pretty soon.

Why not sue the whole state and the local governments in one suit? Make'em do away with all gun restrictions with the following exceptions:

Most Felons
Crazy people
Check in your guns entering govt. buildings & court houses
Private ownership of Nukes

[Roger]

"Notable gun banner, Dianne Feinstein, was equally upset, saying she was "profoundly disappointed" in the Court decision."

Let's get our rights into the National Parks as well.
http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/a...344046&type=CO

Like I give $h!t what Feinstein thinks?? She is a moron.

[igofshn]

Like I give $h!t what Feinstein thinks?? She is a moron.

You should, she is one of your senators.

[sarah]

You should, she is one of your senators.

Ain't that the truth... all I meant was that I'm glad things didn't go her way for once. I will continue my letter bombardment to her office!

[Kodiak Spirit]

AMEN! now we need to keep the anti-gunners outta office to keep it that way! the vote was not 100% like it should have been, this victory would feel better if it wasn't a wishy-washy 4-5!

Obama will ask for a re-count I'm sure! (if'n he gits a chance)

Now we need to keep their hands off of the ammunition side of the house!

[USMC 0369]

My guess is that the anti-gun lobby is already gathering data from the moment the ruling was issued to show how the outcome increased gun violence in the United States. Problem is...someone show me how much violence wasn't caused by the ruling. Can't do that can ya?

I anticipate the price of ammo coming down or a new court ruling on that too.

Roger...I think that ALL convicted felons should have their right to carry a firearm taken. It's a FELONY...it's no longer a misdemeanor for a reason. There is some kind of a backstory which did not allow them to plea-bargain down to misdemeanor. Those guys shouldn't have guns IMHO.

I think this ruling is long overdue and completely unecessary (sp?). It's written into the constitution for all to read. Why did we need a court order saying we have the rights we already have laid out in the 2nd Amendment? I think that D.C.'s law should have never been allowed by the Supreme Court to be put into place. Isn't that what they do?

[/RANT]

[king4wd2]

Like I give $h!t what Feinstein thinks?? She is a moron.

Amen to that! Yes, I used to live in California, she is a moron!!

[Deamer]

I think this ruling is long overdue and completely unecessary (sp?). It's written into the constitution for all to read. Why did we need a court order saying we have the rights we already have laid out in the 2nd Amendment? I think that D.C.'s law should have never been allowed by the Supreme Court to be put into place. Isn't that what they do?

[/RANT]

It started with the Miller case in the 30's. He was a bootlegger that got caught with a sawed off shotgun accross state lines. When it was appealed to the high courts Miller had been killed and his lawyers didn't show up to court. Since no one was there to dispute it, the judges ruled the shotgun was not a normal militia weapon and almost every court after that took the 2nd as a collective right of the militia. That is why the Ca assault weapon ban is still here. When it was taken to court after it was enacted, the CA supreme court ruled the 2nd was a collective right and a normal citizen did not have the right to bear arms.


The fight is not over yet, CA and the gun grabbers are just going to try to find ways to get around the ruling. Even though the SCOTUS ruled the ban was bad, the mayor of DC is still banning semi-automatic handguns even though the Judge ruled that firearms in "common use" are protected by the 2nd.

Along with the NRA, the Calguns Foundation www.calguns.net is filing lawsuits against CA stupid laws. One guy has applied for a AW permit and got denied so he has some "ammunition" against CA. Thing are goig to be changing and hopefully for the better but we can't let our guards down.

[Roger]

I quit the NRA years ago (70's) when every week all they did was ask for money and I saw no results. I told a friend the other day that if Gun groups would star filing lawsuits against the State of Californa, I may just join.

On another note, I sent an email to the San Bernardino County District Attorney asking him if he felt the Supreme court ruling would have any effect on how he would proscute so called gun violations. I have yet to hear back from his office. I wanted to send the same question to the County Sheriff but could not find an email address for him.

[Kodiak Spirit]

Yeah, the NRA does constantly ask for money. They are not a non-profit, and that makes it harder to "give" sometimes. I am a Cal 4 Wheel member for the same reason I am a NRA member, and Cal 4 Wheel doesn't really ask for money without doing a raffle or event, but they DO need money just like the NRA to operate.

The fact of the matter is I don't want to have a lawyer on retainer. I don't really like lawyers at task. I don't have a problem with the people, but at task a lawyer is usually an unpleasant proposition, not to mention the $$.

The Tree huggers, Land Grabbers, Green Path North, Anti-Gunners, PETA, These People...

They set up non-profits and spend lots of $$. They have more time than me because their hobby IS the activist thing. Their passion is to stop my freedom. They don't want to go wheelin' or hiking or shooting or play on the trails with their kids.... they just want to stop me and everyone else from doing those things. That's why they win so much.

Instead of investing thousands of dollars in a Jeep or hundreds on a gun or spend time in the outdoors that they want to protect, they spend their time and money on lawyers and organizations to stop you from doing what you want to do.

Do what you want, everyone has reasons for making the decisions they make.

MJR, NRA, Cal4, Pirate, I mean our organizations are not the bulldogs they should be because our competition puts forth fuzzy bunnies and babys and nature and points fingers.

I wish the ruling didn't need to be made, I wish that the 2nd was reguarded with such fevor as the 1st, but in our society it just isn't the case. Most of us are rugged individuals that just want to do what we do and be left alone. But they won't leave us alone, they will take advantage of the hunting season and pass anti-hunt legislation while the hunters are buisy.

And if you think that restricting gun ownership and not letting convicted felons have guns is a good thing and works, then you have never cosidered that Felons commit crimes. they don't care about the legality of their gun ownership. They deal with other felons just like them all the time and they live in a world without trust. they will have guns and they won't be known until they are caught.

and sometimes they LIE to get whet they want

Any restriction on gun ownership only becomes a problem for those of us who obey the laws. And the restrictions on convicted felons for firearm ownership keeps those people from defending themselves from the same associates they deal with everyday.

You want the right to bear arms, but you don't want to deal with bad guys owning guns? What makes them bad guys? it's not the guns, or the knife... it's the guy

Too many of us good people don't carry because of the laws. We are afraid of getting caught up in these 'zero tolerance' situations that will put us in jail for 10 years on a gun charge, just for having a gun in the wrong place at the wrong time. These gun laws have us in fear because they are hard to understand and nobody will take the liability to explain them just call the CHP and ask about any gun law ... nobody will tell you what you can or cannot do. it's crazy.

[Roger]

You are right-on Jesse.

[Mtbikbob]

Well said Jesse.

BobO