Chicago's Handgun Strategy Could Lead to SCOTUS Incorporation,Say Legal Scholars

[everallm]

RedNeckRepairs

If you go to www.chicagoguncase.com you'll see they have picked "Heller"'esque plaintiffs.

In addition to SAF and ISRA, plaintiffs include Chicago residents Otis McDonald, a retiree who has been working with police to rid his neighborhood of drug dealers, and who wants to have a handgun at his home; Adam Orlov, a former Evanston police officer; software engineer David Lawson and his wife, Colleen, a hypnotherapist, whose home has been targeted by burglars.

Chicago is, in some ways, the easiest next step after DC as the rules in place are functionally almost identical.

The steps after Chicago, which may or may not lead to incorporation, are the more difficult ones.

These would be the NYC, NJ, CA ones restricting weapons on cosmetic features, arbitrary magazine limits, institutional aggression against law abiding ownership of firearms and so on.

These will be where the "reasonability of regulation" element of Heller will be thrashed out.

For example is NJ's requirement of a Firearms ID card to purchase any firearm or ammunition, that can take a year to be "approved" for, at the arbitrary whim of the local PD "reasonable".

Is a 15 round magazine limit "reasonable" where such magazines are effectively not in existence for most semi automatic rifles leading to a de-facto 10 round limit.

Etc etc

 

[rainbowbob]

everallm is correct in pointing out the many issues that will thrashed out over the next decades.

But...Once the right to "keep" arms has been clearly established as applying to the states - shouldn't the right to "bear" arms (i.e., open and concealed carry) be the top priority?

 

[GEM]

Hitler aside - not calling someone Hitler but history.

I read in some WWII book that Hitler was confused by the Japanese quick march to Singapore and offered the Brits to help fight the 'Yellow Peril' - until someone explained it to him. It might have been in one of Churchill's books but I might be wrong on that. Hitler thought the Aryans in the UK could still bond with his folks.

Hitler viewed the US as a mongel nation and didn't care what happened to us. If this is a true bit of history -

 

[Sam Adams]

Is a 15 round magazine limit "reasonable" where such magazines are effectively not in existence for most semi automatic rifles leading to a de-facto 10 round limit.

Once you have the 2nd applied to the states, that question will become almost moot. Why? Because the 15-round limit applies to NJ (and maybe one or 2 other states). While the legal existence of 20+ round mags may be negligible in NJ, it isn't negligible in the rest of the country. I can walk into any gun store, gun show or flea market here in Texas and walk out with as many 20 and 30 round mags as I can carry.

BTW, I used to live in NJ after their AWB was passed. I went to Pennsylvania ("Where America Starts" according to then Gov. Bob Casey) and bought DOZENS of (NJ-illegal) mags, as a way of flipping Florio the bird.

It still amazes me that one can go to prison for owning a plastic or metal box with a spring inside of it - what are you going to do, throw it at someone? I simply cannot believe that the Supremes will countenance ANY ban on mag size in any jurisdiction.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

One of the huge scams in Chicago is legal fees. A ton of money goes out that way, and a chunk of it undoubtedly finds its way back to Daley and his cronies.

I think that's the long and the short of it, as to why they are fighting it. There's some backroom deals with the lawyers who will have to be hired & paid to defend the lawsuit (and lose), with undoubtedly some understood kickbacks from said legal fees to the mayor to be paid. And they have a big chuckle because it's all on the tab of the taxpayer, and the taxpayers there will actually THANK them for wasting their money that way - by re-electing them. Follow the money.

Agree that it's an excellent case to isolate the incorporation issue, if they're going to stick to the full and complete ban. Gotta love 'em.

 

[rainbowbob]

There's some backroom deals with the lawyers...Follow the money...Gotta love 'em.

There it is. We have a motive. As long as Daley, et al get paid - AND re-elected - they don't care about the outcome.

 

[scout26]

If a fireman is going to your home and you have 40 weapons

Yes, because that burning wood, plastic and METAL makes the fire that much more dangerous.

 

[Igloodude]

If the nation's highest court says it's OK to keep guns in your home for self-defense, what's to prevent those guns from being used against police officers and firefighters who respond to a domestic quarrel or other emergency, the mayor said.

"What does a policeman do when there's a domestic battery [call] and they're both armed? Do they enter the home or apartment or do they wait outside? ... How 'bout the neighbors? How 'bout the postman -- all the other issues that go with people coming into your home or close to your home? ... Whose responsibility is it when your son takes the gun outside and police come by?" Daley told reporters at a senior citizen development in Roseland.
[...]
"It's just not allowing people to arm themselves. How many guns do you have -- 50, 60? Can they have a .357 Magnum? Can they have ammunition that will go through a wall? What is the liability of the owners? ... Do you have to have insurance if you have a gun? How much ammunition can you have if there's a fire? If a fireman is going to your home and you have 40 weapons and 1,000 rounds, do we have a responsibility to notify all the neighbors?" Daley said.

"There's a lot of questions to be asked...

The thing that annoys me most, is that Daley appears to be treating these as rhetorical or "we have to sit down and think about it for weeks" questions. Hey pal, I have a great idea - go ask the mayors of cities like Miami, Dallas, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Norfolk, Portland (either one), Atlanta, Denver, Jacksonville, Seattle, Nashville, San Antonio, or Tampa, which I'm guessing have somehow avoided having a complete breakdown of law and order despite not seriously impeding law-abiding residents from keeping a pistol in their own homes.

 

[Gibbles]

:banghead:

I hope they loose...

I'm glad that Utah has gun rights in our state constitution, utah gov cannot make their own laws. If it's allowed federally, they cannot ban or limit.
it's pretty much like Montana in that respect.
I love this state.