Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: McDonald Ruling May Doom 1 Gun A Month

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Thumbs up McDonald Ruling May Doom 1 Gun A Month

    http://virginia.watchdog.org/1068/gu...-crosshairs-2/

    SNIP:"Some laws are going to be in trouble and some laws won't as long as there is a valid public safety rationale for the law and it does not interfere with the right to keep and bear arms," said Alan Gura, an attorney for the plaintiffs in McDonald v. Chicago. "However, if a law is put forward and the benefits are entirely hypothetical, and the law imposes a great deal of restriction and interference, than those laws will fail."



    Asked about Virginia's gun-a-month law, Gura called it "troubling" and said it "needs to be looked at carefully."



    "We know there is a right to have guns and there are legitimate reasons for people to buy more than a handgun-a-month," he said. "I would say that law raises some problems."

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post
    http://virginia.watchdog.org/1068/gu...-crosshairs-2/

    SNIP:"Some laws are going to be in trouble and some laws won't as long as there is a valid public safety rationale for the law and it does not interfere with the right to keep and bear arms," said Alan Gura, an attorney for the plaintiffs in McDonald v. Chicago. "However, if a law is put forward and the benefits are entirely hypothetical, and the law imposes a great deal of restriction and interference, than those laws will fail."



    Asked about Virginia's gun-a-month law, Gura called it "troubling" and said it "needs to be looked at carefully."



    "We know there is a right to have guns and there are legitimate reasons for people to buy more than a handgun-a-month," he said. "I would say that law raises some problems."
    And yet Alito ripped into the "public safety" arguments of Chicago & Oak Park with a vengance.

    I have not completed my first reading of the decision, and need to do at least one more after that while taking notes and doing all sorts of cross-checking, but the decision seems to be bigger and better than we had any right to expect.

    Among other things, Alito clarifies "defense in the home" as merely being one of the many purposes noted in Heller.

    stay safe.

  3. #3
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    And yet Alito ripped into the "public safety" arguments of Chicago & Oak Park with a vengance.

    I have not completed my first reading of the decision, and need to do at least one more after that while taking notes and doing all sorts of cross-checking, but the decision seems to be bigger and better than we had any right to expect.

    Among other things, Alito clarifies "defense in the home" as merely being one of the many purposes noted in Heller.

    stay safe.
    From what I've gotten so far, it fills a lot of the holes left open by Heller.
    My guess is the Brady's are thinking of Jim Jones Kool Aid right now.

  4. #4
    Regular Member riverrat10k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    on a rock in the james river
    Posts
    1,453
    Peter, they are spinning this as a win at Brady and VPC. See this thread:

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...=1#post1295400

  5. #5
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    What else can they say?

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297
    Hmm makes me wonder if Mr Gura wants to drop his next lawsuit off at a Virginia courthouse,

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    SNIP My guess is the Brady's are thinking of Jim Jones Kool Aid right now.
    Hee, hee. Maybe Kool-Aid should quick come up with a new flavor. "Sarah Punch". What color? Oh, of course, cyanide blue. Hee, hee.

    No, the Anti-s are too self-centered to kill themselves with Kool Aid. They would rather take all of us down with them. "If I can't have me, no one else can have you, either."

  8. #8
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by longwatch View Post
    Hmm makes me wonder if Mr Gura wants to drop his next lawsuit off at a Virginia courthouse,
    Take a number, VA...

    Mr. Gura has filed a suit against NC already, regarding the "state of emergency prohibition" here.

    http://guywithguns.blogspot.com/2010...ergencies.html


    You'll get your turn soon enough, VA. But there are other states with more pressing issues. I imagine MD, CA and DC are WAY ahead of VA with regards to gun-rights lawsuits. I'm actually a little surprised that the NC suit has been filed so quickly. I was REALLY expecting Md to be next in line to get "Gura'd". But perhaps he wants to build a strong portfolio of a few "easy cases" first before tackling the PRM...

    I'll be calling the SAF tomorrow morning to offer my help with regards to offering supporting testimony, if they'll have me...

  9. #9
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Lightbulb

    F those other states. Lets take Mr Gura hostage and MAKE him work for us! mwhahahaha. Oh wait, he probably carrys a gun, and is a rockstar to every NCer with a gun. Second thought I don't wanna **** with him. **Gets in line politely**

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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