Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 64

Thread: At Supreme Court, Chicago's lawyer seems concerned about open carry rights

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post



    http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-1521.pdf

    SNIP


    MR. FELDMAN: Well, it's just that the end -- I have two points I would like to make about that. One is the analysis the Court used in Heller. In Heller, what the Court said is: This is not the time to balance things; you cannot ban handguns.
    Now, there may be local -- there have been local jurisdictions before and there are now ones where they feel allowing some firearms, but banning handguns, is the best way to achieve public safety and to increase the zone of ordered liberty for their people. And those things would be apparently impermissible under Heller.
    But even more than that, Heller construed the Second Amendment's "bear" -- the word "bear," "to keep and bear arms" -- to mean the same thing as "carry" in this Court's case in Muscarello much later. And to carry -- generally to carry.
    Many -- there is a long history of regulation of not just concealed carry, as the Court did recognize in Heller, but of ban -- of banning open carry in a variety of jurisdictions. Again, generally, it's someplace that is -- it has a particular problem; it's a city or something like that.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    Of course they are concerned. The core right tobear arms is the open carry of handguns and long guns.

    If SCOTUD says as much, then wooooohoooo!!!, the right is really a right.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    is it just me, or does that statement seem a tad incoherent and disconnected?
    Read the arguments.........Nearly everything Feldmen says is incoherent and disconnected.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  4. #4
    Regular Member sccrref's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
    Posts
    741

    Post imported post

    Hopefully, that will help our side carry the day with a big win!

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    So we may ahve to wait til June to get that decision too?


    Anyway, Feldman seems very unsure of what he is saying.

  6. #6
    Regular Member March Hare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Arridzona - Flatlander
    Posts
    355

    Post imported post

    Of course it sounds incoherent and disconnected, they have to present and argue facts, not emotions.

    Without the emotional aspect of the gun banners argument, they have nothing!

    We, on the other hand, have facts from many solid sources to present.
    $2 Bill - Calling Card of the 2A Movement
    If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
    Seriously, who is John Galt?
    Vires et honestas

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Elkhorn City, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    Talk to any anti-gun "fill in the blank" for more than a few seconds and they all sound that way. No facts, no history, no logic....just emotion and opinions.

  8. #8
    Guest
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    958

    Post imported post

    Flashbang wrote:
    Talk to any anti-gun "fill in the blank" for more than a few seconds and they all sound that way. No facts, no history, no logic....just emotion and opinions.
    +1. My favorite anti gun comment often heard is..."Think of the children".:?

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    GWbiker wrote:
    Flashbang wrote:
    Talk to any anti-gun "fill in the blank" for more than a few seconds and they all sound that way. No facts, no history, no logic....just emotion and opinions.
    +1. My favorite anti gun comment often heard is..."Think of the children".:?
    Think of the children... that will be killed, kidnapped, or raped because I am disarmed? Don't tell me think of the children when your bovine feces will lead to their pain and suffering. I think of MY children and I love them enough to PROTECT THEM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Aurora, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    116

    Post imported post

    Read the entire thing.

    I still think there is a fundamental right to self defense. Incorporated or not.

    The method of self defense should be sufficient to enable the bearer of arms to field such arms in defense of home and country.

    States should not be allowed to restrict or regulate it and definitely not the Fed.



    Just my 2 cents worth...

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hodgenville, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,261

    Post imported post

    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    is it just me, or does that statement seem a tad incoherent and disconnected?
    A man cannot cry and talk at the same time.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Occupied Territory , Illinois, USA
    Posts
    82

    Post imported post

    In a way I kinda felt bad for Feldman... He came in at the 11th hour and had to TRY to base his argument based on Chicago's POS brief. Playing devils advocate, could anybody have read that **** and tried to defend it without becoming a bumbling mess?

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    is it just me, or does that statement seem a tad incoherent and disconnected?
    Read the arguments.........Nearly everything Feldmen says is incoherent and disconnected.
    It's not an accident. A major part of the attack on rights is confusion. You can't rebut it if you can't figure it out. The "In summation" is where all that droning, stuttering, and incoherent jibberish is treated like a foundation for some empty assertion "In summation, guns are bad, kill everyone who has them." All that blabbering is incomprehensible nothingness, but there's so much of it, it has to be valid and meaningful, right? I'm but a peasant, I better let those way-smart people decide everything for me...

    Same reason why they can use terms incorrectly when referring to their hated enemy, the gun. They don't even have to know the difference between a barrel, a stock, and a magazine. It's just a bunch of scary-sounding noise to their target audience; and they know it.

    All they need is noise. They don't intend anyone to understand it. It isn't even sane most of the time. They know the people they want on their side are the ones who don't know any better and can't understand it anyway. They just need it to be loud, caustic, scary-sounding, and endless.

    Anything other than the truth, benefits the liar. Doesn't matter what it is.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran XD-GEM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    722

    Post imported post

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    is it just me, or does that statement seem a tad incoherent and disconnected?
    Read the arguments.........Nearly everything Feldmen says is incoherent and disconnected.
    Making an argument before the U.S. Supreme Court is like the Superbowl for lawyers. It's also nerve-wracking. The Justices make a point of trying to rattle the lawyers. Most of the real legal wrangling was in the briefs. The oral presentation is simply to flesh out the arguments.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    XD-GEM wrote:
    Brass Magnet wrote:
    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    is it just me, or does that statement seem a tad incoherent and disconnected?
    Read the arguments.........Nearly everything Feldmen says is incoherent and disconnected.
    Making an argument before the U.S. Supreme Court is like the Superbowl for lawyers. It's also nerve-wracking. The Justices make a point of trying to rattle the lawyers. Most of the real legal wrangling was in the briefs. The oral presentation is simply to flesh out the arguments.
    Flesh out, flush out...

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    CraigC178 wrote:
    In a way I kinda felt bad for Feldman... He came in at the 11th hour and had to TRY to base his argument based on Chicago's POS brief. Playing devils advocate, could anybody have read that **** and tried to defend it without becoming a bumbling mess?
    Yeah, someone can! The Obamessiah can polish all turds, just put it on a teleprompter. In fact, since he is the Obamessiah, he can turn turds into gold. AH! Now I know how he plans to pay for it all....
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  17. #17
    Regular Member riverrat10k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    on a rock in the james river
    Posts
    1,453

    Post imported post

    N6ATF wrote:
    GWbiker wrote:
    Flashbang wrote:
    Talk to any anti-gun "fill in the blank" for more than a few seconds and they all sound that way. No facts, no history, no logic....just emotion and opinions.
    +1. My favorite anti gun comment often heard is..."Think of the children".:?
    Think of the children... that will be killed, kidnapped, or raped because I am disarmed? Don't tell me think of the children when your bovine feces will lead to their pain and suffering. I think of MY children and I love them enough to PROTECT THEM.
    My wife and I were not blessed with children.

    Nothing warms my heart more than seeing fellow OC'ers with their children at the dinners.

    Despite what anyone says, this, and women OC'ers, are the best advertising we can have. Still smile when I recall the 6 year old girl at Dominion with her pink .22.
    Remember Peter Nap and Skidmark. Do them proud. Be active. Be well informed. ALL rights matter.

    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when you may have to back up your acts with your life."

    --Robert A. Heinlein

    Hey NSA! *&$# you. Record this--- MOLON LABE!

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    N6ATF wrote:
    GWbiker wrote:
    Flashbang wrote:
    Talk to any anti-gun "fill in the blank" for more than a few seconds and they all sound that way. No facts, no history, no logic....just emotion and opinions.
    +1. My favorite anti gun comment often heard is..."Think of the children".:?
    Think of the children... that will be killed, kidnapped, or raped because I am disarmed? Don't tell me think of the children when your bovine feces will lead to their pain and suffering. I think of MY children and I love them enough to PROTECT THEM.
    I wonder why it never crosses the anti-gun parent's mind that actually being able to protect your child from harm might be a good idea? What do they think is going to happen if a kidnapper tries to snatch their kid? Carjacking is another common way that the kid in the car seat ends up gone. What can they do about either of those things?

    Nothing, nada, zip, zilch, zero.

    "Buh bye, Son/Daughter, you just aren't that important. My hateful political agenda needs your mangled, lifeless body! I hereby donate your life to the cause!" - All anti-gun Parents.

    I hope God has a special place in Hell for them.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  19. #19
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    +1. My favorite anti gun comment often heard is..."Think of the children".:?
    I was a caller on the Bob Rivers Show in Seattle on Thursday and was asked about carrying my weapon into a bar. I told them the bar was off-limits but I could sit in the family area without issue. A lady on the show said "you mean where there are kids in highchairs ??" LMAO...


  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1

    Post imported post

    If we win this, it will truly mean that the US Constitution is our concealed-carry permit. I don't care what people think; the citizens of the United States have the right to keep (legally own and possess) and bear (carry upon the person) arms.



  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran Dutch Uncle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,715

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:

    http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-1521.pdf

    SNIP


    -- there have been local jurisdictions before and there are now ones where they feel allowing some firearms, but banning handguns, is the best way to achieve public safety and to increase the zone of ordered liberty for their people.
    Amidst all the incoherence sits this gem: "to increase the zone of ordered liberty.."

    From the DutchUncle Dictionary of Firearms Debate (copyright 2010)

    Ordered liberty: A situation in which a right still exists, but can scarcely be practiced because the liberty to do so has been so thoroughly "ordered". It implies the means by which anti-gun bigots can slowly choke out the essence of a right. (See also Richard J. Daley, Richard M. Daley )

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    blackrifleman wrote:
    If we win this, it will truly mean that the US Constitution is our concealed-carry permit. I don't care what people think; the citizens of the United States have the right to keep (legally own and possess) and bear (carry upon the person) arms.
    So how did you get the infringement of concealed-carry in your mix? Which part of "shall not be infringed" do YOU not understand?

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    blackrifleman wrote:
    If we win this, it will truly mean that the US Constitution is our <snip> carry permit. I don't care what people think; the citizens of the United States have the right to keep (legally own and possess) and bear (carry upon the person) arms.

    You added an unnecessary word.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    wrightme wrote:
    blackrifleman wrote:
    If we win this, it will truly mean that the US Constitution is our <snip> carry permit. I don't care what people think; the citizens of the United States have the right to keep (legally own and possess) and bear (carry upon the person) arms.
    You added an infringement.
    Mmmm doublefixed it.

    Do I get a cookie?
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  25. #25
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    Geez, just reading the transcripts and didn't the Obamessiah teell everyone that we should be more polite? Alan Gura could hardly get out 5 words before the "Justices" were interrupting him. Glad I wasn't the one arguing the case. I'd have politely said "Are you gonna let me speak?
    ‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’ Thomas Jefferson

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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