Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: D.C. Gun Ban Overturned (sorry for the dupe) YEEEEHA!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    186

    Post imported post

    Polishing the Glock in DC - DC Court upholds Second Amendment
    Posted by Macranger on March 9th, 2007

    Another victory for the 2nd Amendment, via How Appealing:

    “BREAKING NEWS — Divided three-judge D.C. Circuit panel holds that the District of Columbia’s gun control laws violate individuals’ Second Amendment rights: You can access today’s lengthy D.C. Circuit ruling at this link.

    According to the majority opinion, “[T]he phrase ‘the right of the people,’ when read intratextually and in light of Supreme Court precedent, leads us to conclude that the right in question is individual.” The majority opinion sums up its holding on this point as follows:

    To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part, to placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second Amendment’s civic purpose, however, the activities it protects are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual’s enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia.

    The majority opinion also rejects the argument that the Second Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia because it is not a State. And the majority opinion concludes, “Section 7-2507.02, like the bar on carrying a pistol within the home, amounts to a complete prohibition on the lawful use of handguns for self-defense. As such, we hold it unconstitutional.”

    Read it again, “Despite the importance of the Second Amendment’s civic purpose, however, the activities it protects are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual’s enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia”.

    This is HUGE for gun rights and a devastating blow for gun control advocates who consitantly try to erode our right to bear arms.

    Let it reverb across the land.


    Here is the .pdf of the actual Circuit Court Ruling:
    http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/...3/04-7041a.pdf

  2. #2
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    WOW!!!

    So does DC appeal? Does this end up at SCOTUS?
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    449

    Post imported post

    What they also conclude is that they aren't touching the arguement of being able to carry in public:

    Heller does not claim a legal right to carry a handgun outside his

    home, so we need not consider the more difficult issue whether

    the District can ban the carrying of handguns in public, or in

    automobiles.

    copied from pg. 57

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, VA, ,
    Posts
    689

    Post imported post

    Let it reverb across the land.
    That is going to be the interesting part Amen!






  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    6

    Post imported post

    The only place left is the US Supreme Court. They have not heard a gun case in over 70 years. I doubt they will hear this one. Which means it will stand. And should they hear it I think with the makeup of the court today, they would probably uphold the decision.

    Please find an online poll regarding the DC Gun Ban and today's important
    court decision at the below link. This is a Washington, DC media outlet and
    it would be great if the response was an overwhelming Yes!

    Please vote and cross-post to your other message boards and networks.

    More information on today's DC Court ruling will appear in tonight's
    Grassroots Alert. Stay tuned.

    http://www.wtopnews.com/

    And another, but I think they are connected.

    http://www.nbc4.com/index.html

  6. #6
    Regular Member Kelly J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    511

    Post imported post

    This ruling came down from the D.C. Circuit :
    To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment
    protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right
    existed prior to the formation of the new government under the
    Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for
    activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being
    understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the
    depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from
    abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the
    important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the
    citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient
    for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part, to
    placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right
    facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be
    barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth
    for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second
    Amendment’s civic purpose, however, the activities it protects
    are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual’s
    enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or
    intermittent enrollment in the militia.

    Oh heres the LINK

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •