Supreme Court Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban, Upholds Right to Keep and Bear Amrs

[eldermike]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,372041,00.html

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court says Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first definitive pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

 

[IisJustMe]

Justice John Paul Stevens in the dissent:
[T]he majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."

This is how out of touch with reality Stevens is: The framers and their fellow citizens all owned guns. They were essential to survival, not just from criminals but from beast and the occasional Red Coat. The did not conceive of a time when a man's firearm would be unnecessary to the protection of his life and his property, and guess what? They were right! There has been no such time, and there will not be, ever, sad a fact as that is to state. A wild and untamed wilderness lay mere miles west of civilization in those days, and the restriction of firearms was unthinkable, and unfortunately, it is also today. The wild and untamed streets, however, have replaced the beauty and majesty of the wilderness with violence, crime and murder.

 

[eldermike]

This is how of touch with reality Stevens is: The framers and their fellow citizens all owned guns. They were essential to survival, not just from criminals but from beast and the occasional Red Coat. The did not conceive of a time when a man's firearm would be unnecessary to the protection of his life and his property, and guess what? They were right! There has been no such time, and there will not be, ever, sad a fact as that is to state. A wild and untamed wilderness lay mere miles west of civilization in those days, and the restriction of firearms was unthinkable, and unfortunately, it is also today. The wild and untamed streets, however, have replaced the beauty and majesty of the wilderness with violence, crime and murder.

He has a fundamental issue with the purpose of the Bill of rights. When taken in proper context it's meaning is to limit powers of government. We need a court that gets it right.
In this case we got lucky, and that's not good enough.

 

[kermit]

SCOTUS made the right decision. An outright ban is an infringement on the right to bear arms. I am interested in reading the dissent when I have time. I'm curious to understand their reasoning.

 

[Yusuf Evans]

Excellent decision, but it's scary to think the justice's were this close in it.

 

[revolutio]

Awesome. It will be particularly interesting to see what the crime rate does over the next year.

 

[eldermike]

This contrasts markedly with the phrase "the militia" in the prefatory clause. As we will describe below, the "militia" in colonial America consisted of a subset of "the people"—those who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range. Reading the Second Amendment asprotecting only the right to "keep and bear Arms" in anorganized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as "thepeople."

Praise God!

We start therefore with a strong presumption that theSecond Amendment right is exercised individually andbelongs to all Americans.

Praise God!!

 

[Billnew]

Awesome. It will be particularly interesting to see what the crime rate does over the next year.

lets see,
Criminals in Washington DC, had and used guns, now law abiding citizens
can get a licenced handgun to use to defend themselves. So this is only making the criminals job more dangerous.

Hard to make a case for the worse gun crime in the country, and having the toughest gun laws too.

This ruling doesn't even restrict licence requirements or registering of firearms. So little has changed by this ruling. But it does open up the door for the whole gambit of "reasonable" gun control measures to be reviewed.

 

[clarksided]

Nice.

Stevens, of course, is still one prominent national judicial position away from a loony bin.

 

[Sphere]

I applaud the SCOTUS for upholding the constitution, once again.

 

[Illuminatus]

lets see,
Criminals in Washington DC, had and used guns, now law abiding citizens
can get a licenced handgun to use to defend themselves. So this is only making the criminals job more dangerous.

Except if we look at the crime rates in the Western countries that have strict gun laws, they're pretty much all lower than the US. There's literally more homicides in the US involving firearms than the next ten countries put together.

My problem isn't that you're all shooting each other. My problem is that American weapons are oozing across the border into Canada.

 

[eldermike]

Except if we look at the crime rates in the Western countries that have strict gun laws, they're pretty much all lower than the US. There's literally more homicides in the US involving firearms than the next ten countries put together.

My problem isn't that you're all shooting each other. My problem is that American weapons are oozing across the border into Canada.

There are other factors driving crime in the US. These factors are not new, crime predates the invention of the handgun.

 

[pgp_protector]

There are other factors driving crime in the US. These factors are not new, crime predates the invention of the handgun.

Shhh Don't let them know about brothers murdering brothers because of unaccepted burnt offerings.

 

[Billnew]

Except if we look at the crime rates in the Western countries that have strict gun laws, they're pretty much all lower than the US. There's literally more homicides in the US involving firearms than the next ten countries put together.

My problem isn't that you're all shooting each other. My problem is that American weapons are oozing across the border into Canada.

Weapons ozzing across the border, isn't affected by law abiding gun owners(except in the case of ignorance), because legal guns in the hands of law abidning citizens don't cross borders. Criminals buy and sell guns to criminals on any border, for any reason.

I think if you drop the guns in your statement, you could say the same about all crime. Rape, robbery, arson, forgery, etc. The USA has higher numbers on all crimes.

Gun crimes won't go up, because guns are legal to owned and kept at home. People wanting to comit crimes don't wait for guns to be legal, they just break another law. So the only people that are affected by gun bans is the law abiding person, the victims of criminals.

 

[eldermike]

You could eliminate crime with gun laws if crime came along with the invention of guns.

Car accidents came as a result of the invention of cars. Knowing this helps. Making laws to protect people from car accidents makes sense.

Logic failure to the tenth degree: Crime is the result of guns. You can't make this work, crime was with us before guns.

This might come as a shock to some, so breath in - breath out, the truth will set you free.

 

[Flashlight]

Though this is awesome I am still not completely happy. How can they say that the 2nd amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms yet ignore the part about not being infringed. How can they let laws limiting concealed weapons stand? And laws outlawing guns in schools and government buildings? I won't be happy until a person carry a gun openly or concealed, loaded or unloaded anywhere in public.

 

[kermit]

Though this is awesome I am still not completely happy. How can they say that the 2nd amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms yet ignore the part about not being infringed. How can they let laws limiting concealed weapons stand? And laws outlawing guns in schools and government buildings? I won't be happy until a person carry a gun openly or concealed, loaded or unloaded anywhere in public.

Infringement != Regulation

 

[jlujan69]

Though this is awesome I am still not completely happy. How can they say that the 2nd amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms yet ignore the part about not being infringed. How can they let laws limiting concealed weapons stand? And laws outlawing guns in schools and government buildings? I won't be happy until a person carry a gun openly or concealed, loaded or unloaded anywhere in public.

I understand what you're saying, but you should realize that even this ruling doesn't grant absolute right to gun ownership, nor should it. No right is absolute. As I heard it once said, your right to express anger stops just short of my nose.

 

[jlujan69]

Except if we look at the crime rates in the Western countries that have strict gun laws, they're pretty much all lower than the US. There's literally more homicides in the US involving firearms than the next ten countries put together.

My problem isn't that you're all shooting each other. My problem is that American weapons are oozing across the border into Canada.

Oddly enough, in states and cities in America with fewer gun restrictions, violent crime is down overall. By the way, how is Switzerland's violent crime rate?

 

[Maren]

I think it is interesting that two pages later and no one has claimed this was nothing more than "judicial activism", just a handful of judges overturning the will of the people (it was a 5-4 vote, after all). I think this once again is evidence that "judicial activism" is nothing more than disagreement with a decision and when you agree, then it is "upholding the Constitution".

And I'm not saying the Supreme Court made a bad ruling, just making a comment on "judicial activism".