US Supreme Court to hear Gun Case

imported post

Heres the link via fox news

http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/28/supreme-court-guns-case-preview/

imported post

I'd like some thoughts on this. If the 2nd amendment gets ruled "fundamental" in the McDonald case then all the firearms regulations basically get thrown out the window at the State and Federal level. IANAL, so I could be reading it wrong (if I'm wrong then Doug or someone else please correct me). For the most part it seems this would really solve all of our carry problems ie. school-zone, Class B liquor, car carry, ccw, gov building. Assuming all of this is correct (and I haven't made a fool of myself by making some crazy assumption:lol then I have to wonder if this would strike down the laws regulating the type of firearms we can own ie. National Firearms Act of 1934.

imported post

GlockMeisterG21 wrote:

If the 2nd amendment gets ruled "fundamental" in the McDonald case then all the firearms regulations basically get thrown out the window at the State and Federal level.

Click to expand...

I do not believe that this ruling alone could even come close to that.... This case is more about the 2nd being incorporated concerning the states. The SCOTUS has already spoken in favor of some regulation staying in place in the Heller case..

imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:

GlockMeisterG21 wrote:

If the 2nd amendment gets ruled "fundamental" in the McDonald case then all the firearms regulations basically get thrown out the window at the State and Federal level.

Click to expand...

I do not believe that this ruling alone could even come close to that.... This case is more about the 2nd being incorporated concerning the states. The SCOTUS has already spoken in favor of some regulation staying in place in the Heller case..

Click to expand...

I second this..although it sure would be nice, to have a favorable ruling nullify all firearms regulations. We won't get lucky like that.

imported post

The supreme court has been careful in cases like this not to go beyond the initial scope of the case. Don't expect all firearms regulations to be struck down. Though we would all like to have unconstitutional restrictions lifted, it will not happen as a result of this case alone.

imported post

GlockMeisterG21 wrote:

I'd like some thoughts on this. If the 2nd amendment gets ruled "fundamental" in the McDonald case then all the firearms regulations basically get thrown out the window at the State and Federal level. IANAL, so I could be reading it wrong (if I'm wrong then Doug or someone else please correct me). For the most part it seems this would really solve all of our carry problems ie. school-zone, Class B liquor, car carry, ccw, gov building. Assuming all of this is correct (and I haven't made a fool of myself by making some crazy assumption:lol then I have to wonder if this would strike down the laws regulating the type of firearms we can own ie. National Firearms Act of 1934.

Click to expand...

IMHO, I think your right on. That is why Chisholm and Flynn are trying so hard to get a ccw bill passed ASAP. Chisholm himself said that their days are numbered. After this decision comes down most of the gun laws in Wisconsin will not be enforceable. Chisholm's words not mine. This means you will be able to carry either ccw or ocw without a permit, fees, mandated training. What more could we possibly ask for?

imported post

Most likely, if it get's incorporated as we think, it'll just open up the door for legal challenges in the future. This in combination with Heller would help challenge the most strict of bans; particularly bans that disallow possession in ones own home.

To abolish all the unconstitutional laws with a decision like this would take the justices applying "strict scrutiny" which has almost zero chance of happening.

Wisconsin will most likely be little affected as our RKBA in our constitution is more strongly worded than even the 2nd amendment. It would effect it by bringing more light to the issue and making it possible to go through federal court when Wisconsin justices don't play nice however.

The Wisconsin SSC has been gingerly stepping around the swiss cheese of gun laws in this state for a long time. I hope the decision on a federal level would get the legislator riled up enough to get some clear and concise legislation passed; particularly around CCW to avoid any legal difficulty.

I guess we wait and see...........

imported post

After Obama scrutinized the SCOTUS I am hoping they send a message. Hopefully it will be one in our favor, which I am sure it will be.

imported post

I expect we will see little changes to existing gun laws at either the federal or state level. I think the most we can expect is a slowdown of capricious state laws. At the state level the Wisconsin courts have ruled that even if the legislature passed a RKBA amendment to the state constitution existing laws are considered to be constitutional. It said so in State v Hamdan and State v Cole when those cases challenged the constitutionality of the concealed carry statute after Article I section 25 was enacted. I expect the opinion of SCOTUS would be similar. Coupled with that, in it's opinon in Heller, the SCOTUS added a "fuse" to the issue. It ruled that reasonable regulation was acceptable. The question is, who determines reasonableness. Typically that decision falls on the shoulder of the court system. My opinion is that all existing laws will remain unchanged until they are challenged in court, one at a time, to determine if they are a reasonable restriction. That will take years.

Most scholars and students of law expect the SCOTUS to find for incorporation. That indeed will be a important decision in our favor, but don't look for it to be a panacea for our problems at the state level. ----My opinions

imported post

I agree.

Incorporation is likely, via the Fourteenth Amendment's 'privileges and immunities' clause or the prohibition of taking without due process life, liberty or property.

Beyond that the law grinds exceedingly fine and exceedingly slowly. If change comes, it will come slowly.