Warrenton NO CCW
New member
imported post
http://revolutionradio.org/2007/11/07/for-non-gun-owners-heller-v-dc-and-2a-in-a-nutshell/
http://revolutionradio.org/2007/11/07/for-non-gun-owners-heller-v-dc-and-2a-in-a-nutshell/
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to announce by Tuesday whether it will hear the District"s appeal of a federal court ruling that lifted the city"s ban on handguns.
The high court"s decision, which could come as early as today, may signal the end of the 30-year-old ban, considered to be among the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. I
f the court denies the appeal, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia will issue an injunction that will stop the District from enforcing some laws that ban residents from owning and registering handguns, city officials said yesterday.
The instructions to issue the injunction would come quickly, officials said. But the process of crafting the injunction could take weeks depending on whether the court writes the injunction independently or develops one based on input from the parties involved in the case.
If the Supreme Court decides to hear the District"s case, which D.C. Attorney General Linda Singer called a matter of "life and death," it will mark the first time that the court will rule directly on the Second Amendment since 1939.
The Second Amendment says: "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."
Mrs. Singer said in September that the case would take about a year to resolve in the Supreme Court.
The District in September appealed a March ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that found restricting residents from keeping guns in their homes is unconstitutional.
The Circuit Court"s ruling overturned a decision in U.S. District Court against six D.C. residents who in 2003 sued the city to keep handguns in their home for protection.
The ban has remained in effect through the appeals process at the request of the city.
Legalizing handguns in the District is opposed by D.C. officials who say that crime in the District will rise if the ban is removed.
"An easily concealable handgun is a criminal"s weapon of choice," D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty said at a September press conference. "More handguns means more gun violence."
Brian Siebel, senior attorney with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said the center will file a brief in support of the city if the Supreme Court takes the case.
"You don"t need to go further than reading the Second Amendment to see the Parker case got it wrong," Mr. Siebel said. "They interpreted that the first 13 words have no purpose whatsoever."
During the summer, representatives of the Brady Center advised D.C. officials against appealing the ruling, saying they worried that the Supreme Court could make a decision that would set a precedent to overturn gun restrictions in other jurisdictions.
The National Rifle Association is waiting for the Supreme Court"s decision to decide how and whether it will take action in the case.
"I think we"re all biting our nails on this," NRA spokeswoman Rachel Parsons said. "Right now, we just want to get through this decision."
The handgun ban, enacted in 1976 to combat a growing number of gun crimes, prohibits residents from owning handguns unless they were registered before the act took effect. Rifles and shotguns are legal, but they must be kept unloaded and disassembled.
In the long run it would be better if the Supreme Court took the case and then affirmed the Circuit Court's ruling. If the Court denies cert for Heller (formerly Parker), the DC ban will still be overturned but the split in the circuits remains: both the DC and 5th Circuit's have ruled that the 2nd Amendment supports an individual right, whereas almost every other circuit supports a collective right. Because of this split the Supreme Court will undoubtedly hear a 2A case sometime in the not-so-distant future.So... if the Supreme Court declines to hear the case; that's good for our cause right? It would mean the ban would be lifted sooner.
"An easily concealable handgun is a criminal"s weapon of choice," D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty said at a September press conference. "More handguns means more gun violence."
Legalizing handguns in the District is opposed by D.C. officials who say that crime in the District will rise if the ban is removed.
"An easily concealable handgun is a criminal"s weapon of choice," D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty said at a September press conference. "More handguns means more gun violence."
WOW! the NRA spokeswoman sure blistered the paint with those remarks! Such strong language in defense of the 2nd Amendment! With that kind of help we'll be disarmed by Christmas. :banghead:
Well, the NRA finally stopped calling me asking for money. I told them that every time they called asking for money, I would send a donation, but not to them.
Those donations went to the GOA and to the Ron Paul for president campaign.
Guess they finally decided that their calls were counter productive to their purpose.
Ironic isn't it?
Exactly! In this thread, Doug Huffman posted the following article that outlines the ways in which the NRA has tried to sabotage Heller from it's inception. Frankly, it's disgusting if you ask me.BarryKirk wrote:
Well, if they'd quit compromising our rights away, I might join them.Well, the NRA finally stopped calling me asking for money. I told them that every time they called asking for money, I would send a donation, but not to them.
Those donations went to the GOA and to the Ron Paul for president campaign.
Guess they finally decided that their calls were counter productive to their purpose.
Ironic isn't it?