POLITICS - SCOTUS rules 2A is individual right!

[O.S.O.K.]

I know there's an update thread going, but I thought the title was inadequate for the occasion (no offense intended).

This is really big! The decision affirms the Second Amendment as an individual right. It affirms that it applies to "weapons commonly available" and stikes down the DC handgun ban. This also applies to NYC and Chicago, etc., etc.

Let the lawsuits begin!

While there are also elements of "reasonable restriction" and "not an unlimited right" being included, this is really all that I was hopping for - reasoably. Of course, I'd like an even more liberal ruling (in the book sense of the word), but I'll take this.

Revolution.... belayed.

Here's the full ruling: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content ... 7-2901.pdf
Here's some quotes from the majority opinion: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/heller-quo ... -majority/

[ceb]

But, and I only scanned the ruling itself briefly at this point, they seem to say that licensing and regristration are OK, that worries me a bit!

[KirkD]

Even as a Canadian, I am elated over the decision. Time to pop the corks boys!

[Griff]

Also remember, it knocks down the DC requirement on long gun requirements to be either broken down or locked with a trigger lock device... that's HUGE! And their comments reqarding prohibitions against possession by felons and mentally incompetent are also significant in that both require a finding by a court. I think they were rather narrow in their decision, but... that narrowness works to help others in locales that have similar bans or requirements. I really want to read the full text. Wish ScottT, Charles and some others were still around to give us their feelings.

But, really, we only need one thread for the discussion.

[brucew44guns]

I sure hope Dianne Feinstein isn't right on this, that us poor American citizens will probably be a lot less safe now as a result of the ruling. Maybe her and her commie pals can go out tonight and do a little sad drinking to help relieve their worry and fright, and send letters of sympathy to John Stevens, Steven Breyer, Ruth Ginsburg and Souter, telling them how sad they feel that those misguided Supremes just didn't have enough leftist members trying to help them out on this. I guess Im amazed that righteousness on this matter prevailed, as screwed up as anyone in government acts and thinks these days. Sure glad Schumer was not on the court yet.

[gary rice]

I sure hope Dianne Feinstein isn't right on this, that us poor American citizens will probably be a lot less safe now as a result of the ruling. Maybe her and her commie pals can go out tonight and do a little sad drinking to help relieve their worry and fright, and send letters of sympathy to John Stevens, Steven Breyer, Ruth Ginsburg and Souter, telling them how sad they feel that those misguided Supremes just didn't have enough leftist members trying to help them out on this. I guess Im amazed that righteousness on this matter prevailed, as screwed up as anyone in government acts and thinks these days. Sure glad Schumer was not on the court yet.

finestein doesnt worry too much as she has a ccw here in kalifornia and carries herself. hows that for a hypocrite?

[TNBigBore]

I just got through reading the decision is some detail. One of the comments the struck me the most was one of Scalia's responses to one of Stephen's objections . It reads as follows.

"And JUSTICE STEVENS is dead wrong to think that the right to petition is “primarily collective in nature.”

That is pretty strong language that I am glad was included.

[TNBigBore]

Another of Scalia's comments I found interesting.

"In any event, the meaning of “bear arms” that petitioners
and JUSTICE STEVENS propose is not even the (sometimes)
idiomatic meaning. Rather, they manufacture a hybrid definition, whereby “bear arms” connotes the actual carrying of arms (and therefore is not really anidiom) but only in the service of an organized militia. No dictionary has ever adopted that definition, and we havebeen apprised of no source that indicates that it carriedthat meaning at the time of the founding. But it is easyto see why petitioners and the dissent are driven to the hybrid definition. Giving “bear Arms” its idiomatic meaning
would cause the protected right to consist of the rightto be a soldier or to wage war—an absurdity that no commentator has ever endorsed."

[H_Talon]

washington dc just released .. the ban will stay in place for semi auto and full auto
hand guns .. I guess they will have have to be happy with revolvers ... for now ...

Talon

[gary rice]

washington dc just released .. the ban will stay in place for semi auto and full auto
hand guns .. I guess they will have have to be happy with revolvers ... for now ...

Talon

they might have a problem keeping a ban on semi auto handguns i would think.

[O.S.O.K.]

Griz - I think a separate, new thread or the update thread is fine for discussing the contents, etc.

I was just wanting a new "celebration" thread so to speak

I am sure that the little games by the commies in office in DC right now will be struck down in a lawsuit citing this ruling. Semi auto handguns are most certainly considered "ordinary" today.

They've been ordinary for over 100 years in fact.

[O.S.O.K.]

Reactions to the rulings:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/ap_ ... XeTElMEP0E

By The Associated Press
1 hour, 24 minutes ago



Some reaction to the Supreme Court's ruling Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting:

ADVERTISEMENT

___

"I'm thrilled I am now able to defend myself and my household in my home." — Dick Heller, who sued the District of Columbia after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection.

___

"More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence." — Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty.

___

"The president strongly agrees with the Supreme Court's historic decision today that the Second Amendment protects the individual right of Americans to keep and bear arms. This has been the Administration's long-held view. The President is also pleased that the Court concluded that the DC firearm laws violate that right." — White House press secretary Dana Perino.

___

"While it ruled that the D.C. gun ban went too far, Justice Scalia himself acknowledged that this right is not absolute and subject to reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe. Today's ruling ... will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country." — Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

___

"This opinion should usher in a new era in which the constitutionality of government regulations of firearms are reviewed against the backdrop of this important right." — Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.

___

"The right to bear arms is a fundamental right we enjoy as citizens of the United States. From individuals being able to protect their family and their home to sportsmen venturing into the outdoors, this is an important and historic day for all citizens of this great country." — Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn.

___

"I am profoundly disappointed in Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, both of whom assured us of their respect for precedent. With this decision, 70 years of precedent has gone out the window. And I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it." — Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

___

"Let's be honest about it. This is an actual, enumerated right in the Constitution." — Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.

___

"Today's ruling is a major victory for the rights of all Americans to protect themselves and their families. The Supreme Court sent a clear message to local, state, and federal governments that this individual right cannot be unreasonably infringed." — Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.

___

"I think this is a long overdue decision; I don't think the precedent has been seriously reaffirmed in decades." — Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis.

___

"The nation's top court made the correct decision by reaffirming one of our founding principles, the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. This historic ruling has implications far beyond the District of Columbia." — Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.

___

"Today, President Bush's radical Supreme Court justices put rigid ideology ahead of the safety of communities in New Jersey and across the country. This decision illustrates why I have strongly opposed extremist judicial nominees and will continue to do so in the future." — Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.

___

"In the most significant victory for the Second Amendment in recent memory, the Supreme Court today reaffirmed our citizens' constitutional right to keep and bear arms. ... This decision should send a clear message to opponents of the Second Amendment. The Constitution plainly guarantees the solemn right to keep and bear arms, and the whims of politically correct bureaucrats cannot take it away." — House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

___

"The Supreme Court's decision underscores our country's commitment to protecting the fundamental rights on which America was founded. Today, America has reaffirmed its promise to the right to bear arms." — Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Texas.

___

"While this is a clear victory for those who live in Washington, D.C., it's my hope what was decided here today projects a powerful new precedent for judges to follow across the country." — Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo.

___

"As someone who works in Washington during the week, I'm relieved that I can now defend myself in my own apartment without fearing a knock on the door from the local police," Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga.

___

"Today, the Supreme Court upheld Americans' Second Amendment rights and I applaud the court's decision. I strongly support every citizen's right to keep and bear arms." — Rep. Steve Kagen, D-Wis.


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

Interesting comments....

Also, the NRA IS FILING LAW SUITS AS I WRITE THIS - AGAINST NYC, CHICAGO, ETC., ETC. - TO STRIKE DOWN THEIR ANTIGUN LAWS!!!!!!! Yeah!

John McCain's comments on the decision: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06/26 ... c-gun-ban/

[brucew44guns]

It's easy to look down the list of statements by those who said them, and the negative---sour grapes attitude just keeps right on spewing from from these ignorant people. Every time I saw a negative comment, I was not surprised at all by the commie leftist who said it, it's a pitiful thing to see. I'm going to thank God for those 5 who had some common sense though!!!

[Andrew]

I hope that this brings us good things.

NBC News had it as their first segment and it was awful to see the rats still scratching for a grip on gun control.

[kimwcook]

Andrew, +1. I'm just waiting for the dust to settle and what the end result actually is.

[FWiedner]

Now we get to go back to court to define "reasonable".

[gary rice]

I hope that this brings us good things.

NBC News had it as their first segment and it was awful to see the rats still scratching for a grip on gun control.

whatever the details are ive come to believe that we are still better off than we were yesterday at this time. i dont think it can weaken our position any.

[rimrock]

All in all, the Heller opinion does not surprise me. Except, I'm somewhat amazed at the lack of collegiality among the justices. Scalia had some strong words for Stevens seldom read in Sup. Ct. opinions. This was not a constitutionally invalid opinion like one from the Rhienequist court that relied totally on foreign law to violate stare decisis. This was based on a fairly thorough examination of historical American positions. It pointed out that concealed carry laws have been around since the 1600s. Someone does need to inform the court of the usefulness of sawed off shotguns by the military so the antis cannot misuse that limitation.

I must say I'm fearful of what Obama would consider reasonable. The antis are now going to try to pass as legislation as possible to make it cost prohibitive for gun ownership. Microstamping and lead bullet bans will be welcome when they come up for air.

[Tristan]

As the 'true believers' in the anti-2nd groups will never give up, I expect a storm of proposed legislation by them at all levels of government seeking to restrict the right to utilize 'arms' through registration, taxes, safety checks, etc.; virtually all avenues where the concept of 'reasonable' restrictions may lie.

In the end, this decision was a 'win', but not 'The Win'.

Keep your powder dry, boys, and support whichever pro-2nd amendment organization suits your philosophical bent. It's gonna get rough out there.

- Tristan

[donw]

diane feinstein=moron

frank laudenberg=moron

at the very best....

[O.S.O.K.]

Yes, the true ramifications of this historic decision will come with the lower court findings on the NRA suits being filed against Chicago, NYC, etc.

I'm still pleased we didn't get the shaft like we did on eminent domain and the Guantanamo Bay decision.

It could have gone badly - very badly and we would all be talking about rebellion right now.

I think they knew just how serious this decision was - despite the ignorance of the dissenting justices.

[mescalero1]

We got some breathing room, lets not blow it!

[will2002]

While I am very happy this battle has been won, this IS a nerver ending WAR!!! Do not let down your guard for one second.

[DocHolliday]

+1. Great day for us, but don't EVER turn your back on these people. They will not give up!

[Ysabel Kid]

Reading a lot of the "pull-quotes" from the majority opinion gives me a lot of hope. Not only a solid affirmation, but a rebuke to the four idiots who voted against the majority - in some cases, by name!

The majority opinion is some 177 pages long, so it will be a while before I can read the whole thing. I'm sure there are parts we won't like, but bottom-line, we live to fight another day due to the decision today!!!

[O.S.O.K.]

Form today's Shooting Wire:
"Lawsuit Challenging Chicago's Gun Ban Filed:
Following Thursday's 5-4 ruling by the Supreme Court in the case of Heller v. District of Columbia, the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) filed a federal lawsuit challenging the City of Chicago's long-standing handgun ban. The case, McDonald v. City of Chicago includes Attorney Alan Gura, who argued the Heller Case to the Supreme Court and David G. Sigale, representing the plaintiffs."

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

This will be a fun one! Judges hate having their rulings overturned, so I doubt that they will fail on the first try. But if they do, it's sure to be won on appeal.

And I just want to comment that I've read several times on various boards that "my local rifle association does a far better job than the NRA...." People don't seem to understand that almost all of these state rifle associations are NRA affiliates and supported and partially funded by the national NRA...

[OJ]

Well, we won the big one - even if it was 5-4 vote - beats losing!!!

I celebrated by buying (actually a birthday present from my wife) a new lever rifle !!!

MY MOSSBERG 464 (94 CLONE) ARRIVED AND I PASSED THE BACKGROUND CHECK !!

Haven't shot it yet but gave it the first cleaning and will shoot it today!!!

[SoupOrMan]

Chicago mayor and Cook County overlord Richard M. Daley threw an absolute fit on television yesterday about this. It was a beautiful thing.

[gary rice]

Chicago mayor and Cook County overlord Richard M. Daley threw an absolute fit on television yesterday about this. It was a beautiful thing.

sorry i missed that one for sure. i love to see liberals in turmoil.

[greasy dan]

I celebrated today... by taking my #3 daughter to the shooting range for the first time. She was nervous, but I was happy... in more ways than One. Today was a good day.

[Gary]

In the end, this decision was a 'win', but not 'The Win'.

I respectfully disagree. This ruling is as big as Roe v Wade was. The right to keep AND bear arms is an individual right of each citizen, as now affirmed by the Supremes. We need to shove that fact (rub that fact) in the face of every anti-firearm wacko. (I hope the Brady Campaign is listening.) Give it to them lock, stock and barrel. It's time to take the same arguments & tactics that the Roe v Wade people used over the years and apply it to our Constitutional gun rights.



Gary

[Sixgun]

O.S.O.K.,
This ruling has made me happier than a pig in............ well, you know what. I am almost beginning to have hope again for this Great Nation. As much as many people (even some here) have been busting down on George W., he made some very wise choices that have saved the rest of us considerable aggravation.

The turmoil what would have come had the decision gone the other way is incomprehensible . I can see it now--------year 2010----firearms heavily restricted--------home invasions and tyranny on a sharp rise--------lawful individuals pulling guns out of the woodwork and defying law.----------National Guard, then United Nations troops in OUR country ATTEMPTING to restore law and order.-------------tens of thousands of good people imprisioned---------breakdown of society and economics--------- and then, OSAK, like you said the Revolution. Sure glad that was only delayed-----------------------------------------------Sixgun

[OJ]

In the end, this decision was a 'win', but not 'The Win'.

I respectfully disagree. This ruling is as big as Roe v Wade was. The right to keep AND bear arms is an individual right of each citizen, as now affirmed by the Supremes. We need to shove that fact (rub that fact) in the face of every anti-firearm wacko. (I hope the Brady Campaign is listening.) Give it to them lock, stock and barrel. It's time to take the same arguments & tactics that the Roe v Wade people used over the years and apply it to our Constitutional gun rights.



Gary

Yep - +1

If you really want thee 'Brady Bunch" to hear it - you can go to their site -

http://www.bradycampaign.org/

and tell them directly. I keep it and get their emails so I know what the enemy is doing. Sneaky - eh ???