Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: DC vs. Heller-I just heard that we basically won!!!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    uTAH-life member: NRA, GOA, CCRKBA, ,
    Posts
    291

    Post imported post

    No details yet, but as I sit here listening to the Bob Lonsberry show on 570AM, he's claiming that the Suprem Court has ruled in gun owners favor!! He's digging for details as fast as he can.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    41 Magnum wrote:
    No details yet, but as I sit here listening to the Bob Lonsberry show on 570AM, he's claiming that the Suprem Court has ruled in gun owners favor!! He's digging for details as fast as he can.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/...co/scotus_guns


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

    The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

    The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "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."

    The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

    Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

    The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.

    In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the 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."

    He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."

    Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."

    Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

    Gun rights supporters hailed the decision. "I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.

    The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.

    The capital's gun law was among the nation's strictest.

    Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller's favor and struck down Washington's handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.

    The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.

    Scalia said nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."

    In a concluding paragraph to the his 64-page opinion, Scalia said the justices in the majority "are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and believe the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns."
    The law adopted by Washington's city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.
    Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Orem, Utah, USA
    Posts
    385

    Post imported post

    I posted this on UCC:

    On ABCnews.com this comment from Justice John Paul Stevens, he said, "a conclusion that the Second Amendment protects an individual right does not tell us anything about the scope of that right." Well, as the second amendment states "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" means just that, keep away from our guns! Or better yet, in the words of Pancho Vilos "Gun Grabbers BACK OFF!"
    Charles A. Hall, self-proclaimed Lone Eagle || Carry: Kahr CW40
    Lone Eagle Observer (http://www.charlesahall.us)
    Facebook Page || http://twitter.com/CharlesAHall

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    S L C, ,
    Posts
    72

    Post imported post

    here we go california .... lets see their laws change!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    16

    Post imported post

    Don't hold your breath.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    utsp101 wrote:
    Don't hold your breath.
    Dunno why you're so negative. How much hope do you think the people in Washington had before today?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    16

    Post imported post

    I lived in California for 28 years and saw the anti-gun sentiment grow stronger and stronger. The politicians and leading law enforcement officials are very anti-gun. They also blame guns for the increase in gang related violence. As long as guns and gun owners are scapegoated and the media back that attitude I don't think we'll see much change. If nothing else it will be a long drawn out and expenive process. I hope that it can be done that will be one less problem that California will have.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    Here's a new KSL talking point interview: http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=3628598

    At least they got Clark in the news room where his opinions could be heard... too bad the violence prevention center couldn't supply a fast talking articulate person.

  9. #9
    Regular Member ChinChin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Loudoun County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    683

    Post imported post

    We won Heller? No kidding, I hadn't heard. . .
    The problem with the internet is nobody can really tell when you’re serious and when you’re being sarcastic. –Abraham Lincoln

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    West Valley City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    20

    Post imported post

    xRapidDavex wrote:
    Here's a new KSL talking point interview: http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=3628598

    At least they got Clark in the news room where his opinions could be heard... too bad the violence prevention center couldn't supply a fast talking articulate person.


    WOW...that gun control advocate, got creamed in the interview! I bet they're not too happy with how their message was presentedto the media by that clown. Similar to how we looked in that other interview Clark couldn't hear in a couple weeks ago! Way to goClark...give that man a lolli-pop!!! :celebrate

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    So what's the mayor going to say when the violence does not go up?

    Edit: The interview goes down hill at 3:11

Posting Permissions

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