Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: US High Court gets one right.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    East Windsor, New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    I know Charlton Heston now lays in his resting place with a BIG smile on his face as the question of our Second Amendment rights to own firearms for our personal protection and the protection of our families and property is layed to rest after 127 years. Today in a 5-4 decision the US High Court has upheld our Second Amendment right to bear arms.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Castle Rock, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    779

    Post imported post

    You Jersey folk might still be hosed tho...after reading the opinion, theres not much in there that's going to alleviate your legislative pains.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    East Windsor, New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    I understand that. I was expressing my happiness that:

    They (the USSC) finally got one right for a change.

    Some relief is soon to come to those places where there are gun bans such as DC and San Fransisco.

    Here in NJ we can own long guns and hand guns. It's just impossible to get a carry permit unless you have enough money to pay off a local politician or have an in with someone in law enforcement.

    I didn't get the chance to read the opinions yet but I hope to get to them this weekend. I'm sure it will make for an interesting read.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    c. Meaning of the Operative Clause. Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Silly darn script. Anyway, it appears that SCOTUS expanded, here pg 19, our understanding of RKABA to include 'confrontation.' The only way to be carrying in the event of an unforeseen confrontation is to always be armed.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    East Windsor, New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    This is a question that has come to mind while speaking to a friend about this issue.

    The NJ Constitution reads:

    Article 1 Paragraph 1

    All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.

    How is one to "defend life", "protect property" and "obtain safety and happiness" if we are restricted to possession of our firearms in our homes only? If someone attempts to car jack my personal vehicle (property) I'd have to ask him/her to wait while I go to the trunk, unlock the gun box and load the weapon.

    With the exception of hunting and target shooting gun rights in New Jersey are nothing but smoke and mirrors. I'm sure it is like this in most states. We still have a long way to go before we fully realize the liberty that the Constitution provides for citizens in this area.

    I also find the use of the argument that criminals steal guns from peoples homes interesting. If the gun owners were carrying their weapons with them they wouldn't be in the homes to steal. But what do I know?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    524

    Post imported post

    WildBill wrote:
    With the exception of hunting and target shooting gun rights in New Jersey are nothing but smoke and mirrors. I'm sure it is like this in most states. We still have a long way to go before we fully realize the liberty that the Constitution provides for citizens in this area.
    No, it is not. I can carry concealed in 27 States and I could easily expand that to 33 States. Most States issue CCW permits to any law abidingperson who wants one with little or no hassle. New Jersey has almost the most Draconian gun laws in the USA.

    Ken

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran Dutch Uncle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,715

    Post imported post

    Most of us probably think NJ is one of the "lost causes" for firearms rights, but I try not to be completely pessimistic about such things. The Heller decision may not directly affect NJ's draconian anti-gun laws, but public opinion is focussed on 2nd amendment rights these days, so this might be a good time for New Jersyites to consider some type of public pressure. Since you do have a CCW process, how about getting a few dozen good gun-owning citizens together, all with impeccable credentials, then support them morally and financially in a mass attempt to apply for CCW permits. Let the press know what you are doing so eyes will be on the process. If ALL the permits are refused for the usual bogus reasons, that can be released to the news, so that others can see what elitist snobs their "public servants" are. It would be even better if you could get a list of some of the politicians, celebrities and "connected" people whe do have permits and ask publicly if their lives are really worth more than those of the people on your list.

    Just a thought. There must be other ways you can start to stick it to the socialists up there. Don't let the bastards grind you down.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    East Windsor, New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    What you propose is a good idea as long as you don't live in NJ. The reason I say this is because there are three kinds of people in NJ. There are conservatives, such as myself, who are the minority, liberal progressives (the majority) and people who bury their heads in the sand (the largest majority).

    Nothing effects these people. I'm sure you have read or heard about corruption in NJ government. I have NEVER seen anything like it. More over I've never seen a citizenry more indifferent to it. It's like someone somewhere gathered up every narcissistic person they could find and dumped them in NJ.

    The bottom line is the people don't care about anything but themselves. The politicians here , with the exception of a select few, are corrupt and care about nothing but making all of the money they can make while in office. As far as the media goes, don't get me started on that topic. I have come to the conclusion that New Jersey is the armpit of American society and that it is so because the people have allowed it to become so. New Jersey is perhaps the most liberally progressive state in the nation. If we were talking about abortion rights or gay marriage you would see some movement from these zombies. When it comes to constitutional restoration or preservation however they could care less.

    As for myself I will do what ever I have to do to protect my property and family regardless of the law's here.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    902

    Post imported post

    NJ may not be a lost cause. The Heller case may help out.

    There is now very little federal case law on the second amendment; why you ask??? Here's why....

    For the past 70 years most federal challenges say that it's a collective right. As of last week, ALL that case law is nullified. Silvera v Lockyer and all cases like it mean nothing.

    It's a fresh start, the only thing they can say now is that it's not incorporated; however, that's going to be harder to argue than the collective right arguement was.

    NJ's AWB bans a class of firearms based on appearance, thatprobably won't pass intermediate or strict scrutiny.

    The Heller case strongly referenced open carry. That's another avenue to push.

    There are options in NJ.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    East Windsor, New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    I've only had a chance to read the first 14 pages of the decision. All I can say up to this point is that Scalia is brilliant and spot on.

    Good Reading so far!

Posting Permissions

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