paintballdude902
Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2007
- Messages
- 2,872
yay!!!!!!!!!!!!*yawn*.........i really am excited but i just woke up
Heller Decided! (several threads merged, new ones will be locked)
- Thread starter 30 cal slob
- Start date
- Status
Eightball
Member
I really wish they hadn't left it so vague as to say that the "weapons protected are those 'in common use at the time'", and says that that supports the prohibition of "dangerous and unusual weapons."
AR15s and "regular" capacity autos (I refuse to call the intended capacity of a magazine for which the thing was designed as "hi-capacity," rather, it's the "true capacity) are in "common use", but I don't know if that will help us keep them from being banned, unless that language was specifically put there to allow us to argue market dominance of such weapons as proof of their reality "in common use," and thus not "dangerous and unusual" weapons.
I hope.
AR15s and "regular" capacity autos (I refuse to call the intended capacity of a magazine for which the thing was designed as "hi-capacity," rather, it's the "true capacity) are in "common use", but I don't know if that will help us keep them from being banned, unless that language was specifically put there to allow us to argue market dominance of such weapons as proof of their reality "in common use," and thus not "dangerous and unusual" weapons.
I hope.
Cosmoline
Member
We'll have to see how it gets fleshed out. This opinion is Scalia's baby. I was actually hoping for a narrower 6-3 opinion written by someone else. Right now the thing is still vulnerable. It hasn't been in place long enough to resist reversal if the makeup of the court is changed in the next 4 or 8 years. Thomas is young (for a justice) but Scalia is 72. If heaven forbid he dies, an Obama administration would be able to replace him with someone to his left, leaving a Roberts-Alito-Thomas minority and swinging the majority against Heller.
Anyway it's an added element to the Presidential election process.
Anyway it's an added element to the Presidential election process.
Seancass
Member
they mayor of DC just said semi-auto handguns are still going to be illegal.
do what???
do what???
fletcher
Member
Isn't there some law that applies to public officials who repeatedly refuse to follow our established system and rulings? Treason, maybe?
hankdatank1362
Member
I like the arguement that the only reason FA weapons aren't in "common use" was because of the fact they were prohibitively taxed in 1934, and the closing of the registry artifically skyrocketed the prices on the items themselves.
Do away with the NFA, or at least reopen the registry, and watch MGs become "common".
That said, I bought a new handgun to celebrate this morning! Just a P22, but it's the first step into the NFA game!
Do away with the NFA, or at least reopen the registry, and watch MGs become "common".
That said, I bought a new handgun to celebrate this morning! Just a P22, but it's the first step into the NFA game!
ProguninTN
Member
Mayor Fenty
Agreed, but is there a source ?
Agreed, but is there a source ?
CountGlockula
Member
Great news, I'm going to range today. Pick up some extra ammo...and maybe another Glock.
Anyways, when I first heard of it on CNN they had a story of two DC women...obviously one pro and one con. The con was a victim of the tragic VT shooting...she said that guns are for the government and those average citizens that have guns think they are "super heroes". First of all, she's a foreign student...second..she's a foreign student that doesn't understand what it means to be an American...thirdly, did I mention she was from another country?
Rant over.
Hoooray for the 2nd!!!
Anyways, when I first heard of it on CNN they had a story of two DC women...obviously one pro and one con. The con was a victim of the tragic VT shooting...she said that guns are for the government and those average citizens that have guns think they are "super heroes". First of all, she's a foreign student...second..she's a foreign student that doesn't understand what it means to be an American...thirdly, did I mention she was from another country?
Rant over.
Hoooray for the 2nd!!!
george29
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,670
I also did a double take wondering if he knew what he was saying, but I think that if Fenty DOES restrict semo-automatic handguns he will be doing the gun industrfy a favor because the SIX shooter (any revolver) will once again be synonomous with the good guys and winning the West. I carry a revolver for SD and do not feel undergunned.
As it happens, every time Fenty tries something, it backfires in his face, by allowing revolvers and not semi's this could force the manufacturers to produce more extensive revolvers like modern top-breaks in large bore caliber that withstand modern pressures.
All in all, Fenty did a great job of keeping his game face on, the people around him were just plain stunned!
As for McCain. I had a problem with voting for him until today. Now I know that I will definitely vote for him (as opposed to staying home and getting drunk).
This certainly provides a great stepping stone to challenge other assinine laws on the book, but its not yet a victory that we can all be comfortable with.
Warning: Sarcasm
After all, it is a "reasonable" licensing fee of $1500/year for the right to own a gun. I mean, only $1500, after all if your average income is $140k+ a year, that's nothing, and quite reasonable! /sarcasm
Warning: Sarcasm
After all, it is a "reasonable" licensing fee of $1500/year for the right to own a gun. I mean, only $1500, after all if your average income is $140k+ a year, that's nothing, and quite reasonable! /sarcasm
Obama released a statement saying he has always viewed the 2A as an individual right but also recognizes the cities need to protect their children. What a LIAR and he has to throw in another "Its for the children" comment. This guy is a moron. 
How the BBC are reporting it to the sheeple of Gt Britain.
US court overturns DC handgun ban
A ban on handguns in Washington DC has been ruled unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court.
In a 5-4 decision, the justices upheld a lower court ruling striking down the ban. They said individuals had a right to keep handguns for lawful purposes.
It is the first such case considered by the court in decades and is expected to have effects on gun laws across the US.
Debate over the exact meaning of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms has raged for years.
The latest ruling says that the constitution "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home".
The BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says the ruling is of profound importance, as it enshrines for the first time the individual right to own guns and limits efforts to reduce their role in American life.
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
Second Amendment to the US Constitution
Since 1976, the private possession of handguns had been prohibited in the nation's capital, while rifles and shotguns had been required to be locked away or dismantled.
The DC city council argued that the ban was needed to help keep violence and murder rates down.
But the measure was challenged by a security guard, Dick Heller.
He argued that if he was allowed to have a handgun at work, he also had a constitutional right to have one at home.
Friends of the court
In March last year, a federal appeals court agreed with Mr Heller that the Second Amendment protected an individual's right to keep and bear arms and that the DC ban was unconstitutional.
The city appealed against that ruling, with the case going to the Supreme Court.
The debate is centred on whether the Second Amendment, ratified in 1791, protects an individual's right to possess guns, or simply a collective right for an armed militia.
The case has been closely watched, with dozens of outside groups filing opinions, known as "friends of the court" briefs, setting out their arguments for or against the DC ban.
The Supreme Court's ruling could spark challenges to gun control laws in other parts of the US, experts say.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/7474924.stm
Published: 2008/06/26 15:31:49 GMT
© BBC MMVIII
US court overturns DC handgun ban
A ban on handguns in Washington DC has been ruled unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court.
In a 5-4 decision, the justices upheld a lower court ruling striking down the ban. They said individuals had a right to keep handguns for lawful purposes.
It is the first such case considered by the court in decades and is expected to have effects on gun laws across the US.
Debate over the exact meaning of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms has raged for years.
The latest ruling says that the constitution "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home".
The BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says the ruling is of profound importance, as it enshrines for the first time the individual right to own guns and limits efforts to reduce their role in American life.
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
Second Amendment to the US Constitution
Since 1976, the private possession of handguns had been prohibited in the nation's capital, while rifles and shotguns had been required to be locked away or dismantled.
The DC city council argued that the ban was needed to help keep violence and murder rates down.
But the measure was challenged by a security guard, Dick Heller.
He argued that if he was allowed to have a handgun at work, he also had a constitutional right to have one at home.
Friends of the court
In March last year, a federal appeals court agreed with Mr Heller that the Second Amendment protected an individual's right to keep and bear arms and that the DC ban was unconstitutional.
The city appealed against that ruling, with the case going to the Supreme Court.
The debate is centred on whether the Second Amendment, ratified in 1791, protects an individual's right to possess guns, or simply a collective right for an armed militia.
The case has been closely watched, with dozens of outside groups filing opinions, known as "friends of the court" briefs, setting out their arguments for or against the DC ban.
The Supreme Court's ruling could spark challenges to gun control laws in other parts of the US, experts say.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/7474924.stm
Published: 2008/06/26 15:31:49 GMT
© BBC MMVIII
Kudos to the High Court !! It about time they stepped up to the plate on a ruling; not one since 1791? It's a great step in the right direction for law abiding folk's rights !! Now I might even visit DC again, seeing that I left that place in 1974 for Florida! Glad Florida's CCW laws are the gold standard for other states, or so it seems.
My hats off for the court today !!
My hats off for the court today !!
ProguninTN
Member
Count Glockula
I'm glad somebody else noticed that the anti interviewed was a foreigner. Even though I may disagree with anti's opinions, I still think CNN would do a better job covering both sides of the issue by actually interviewing Americans.
I'm glad somebody else noticed that the anti interviewed was a foreigner. Even though I may disagree with anti's opinions, I still think CNN would do a better job covering both sides of the issue by actually interviewing Americans.
scrat
Member
can i get a HELLL YAAA
BigRobT
Member
Wayne LaPierre just announced that the NRA will file suit in Chicago and it's gun banning suburbs.
Seancass
Member
and helmke just said he would push for a ban of military style weapons, new day, same do-do.
oh, and i didnt know he was from indiana. that embarrassing.
oh, and i didnt know he was from indiana. that embarrassing.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
