DC just unveiled its new restrictions...

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the grand tradition of Federal Enforcement of civil rights decisions by the Supreme Court, I say that the National Guard should be dispatched to ensure that the local government complies with the ruling.
Click to expand...

If only the feds had balls when it matters. It would be amazing to see a gun dealer legally selling firearms on the VA side of the border. Then transfer the firearm 10 feet to a FFL on the DC side of the border who does background check and hand weapon to a citizen. The national guard their to prevent interference from local police. The guard could even provide escort from state line to the police department when the weapon is to be registered.

It would be amazing to see 1000+ weapons a day registered. Congress telling DC that the national guard will remain in place enforcing the decision until:
1) There are 2 or more local gun shops so citizens can purchase weapons locally.
2) The restrictions on auto loaders is rescinded.
3) The law making a weapon with 12+ rounds a machinegun is removed.
4) Clarified laws indicating that all weapons can be stored w/o locks in personal property (home).
5) Clarify procedure to allow all weapons to be registered.

Of course it will never happen but for once I wouldn't mind the governor of VA called me up for something like that.
 
What supreme court case do you think should have brought us incorporation?
Click to expand...
None! Because there hasn't been any, that's my point. Heller solved nothing,....The States' Still have The Final Word! I don't like it any better than you do, but that's the way it is.
 
In the grand tradition of Federal Enforcement of civil rights decisions by the Supreme Court, I say that the National Guard should be dispatched to ensure that the local government complies with the ruling.
Click to expand...
Sounds good in theory, but it'll never happen. The Supreme Courts' Heller ruling is full of holes, and We, The People, were not meant to benefit from that ruling. That's why they did it the way it did.
 
I am actually happy Heller didn't mess with incorporation or licensing, we barely won as it was 5/4, I wouldn't have wanted anything else interjected into it.

The NRA suing Chicago will be the Incorporation case,
 
I am actually happy Heller didn't mess with incorporation or licensing, we barely won as it was 5/4, I wouldn't have wanted anything else interjected into it.

The NRA suing Chicago will be the Incorporation case
Click to expand...
Yeah right, keep dreaming.

Quit worrying about who our next president will be. Start worrying about who your next state governor will be!
 
pretty much sucks. kinda reminds me of history in the past. when you cant win the court rulling you change the rules. Too much history in the past. Kinda sad they need to grow up. i guess you can what keep it loaded in your safe. dont know. so if i put a combination lock on my front door can i call it a safe to the house
 
It's as hot as the fires of Heck here for months at a time, but I thank my lucky stars I was born and raised in Texas!!!

Read "Unintended Consequences". I think we might be getting close.
 
Rugerman,
do you have legal cites, papers, opinions or arguments to back up your belief that the courts won't ultimately find that the 2nd amendment isn't incorporated against the states?

There only precedent is from 1876 at a time when court favored the BoR as a check against federal power only. Prior to 1876 NO ammendments were incorporated against the states The courts stance changed dramatically in early 20th century. Since then no case has come up before the SC and thus the SC hasn't ruled either way.

How / why are you so certain the 2nd ammendment won't be held against the states. The court has generally only incorporated rights that are fudemental. Based on Scalia's language I think (IMHO) that the majority believes the 2nd is a fundamental right to be enjoyed by all Amercians.

Of course we won't know until there is a ruling. My understanding is that there is a case before 9th circuit which could rule 2nd amendment is incorporated against CA. If not likely it will be appealed possibly all the way to the very same SCOTUS that ruled 2nd amendment is an individual right.

I am not saying the SCOTUS will incorporate the 2nd but I also don't think it is a guarantee that they won't either. I am just wondering what makes you so sure that they won't.
 
A couple out of the 4 SCOTUS judges who voted aginst the 2nd will probably vote for incorporation as the issue is no longer what the 2nd amendment means but if a constitutionally protected right has to be recognized by the state.
 
None! Because there hasn't been any, that's my point. Heller solved nothing,....The States' Still have The Final Word! I don't like it any better than you do, but that's the way it is.
Click to expand...
Well thats actually sort of my point as well, we really needed the 2nd amendment to be declared an individual right before we could go for incorporation. I understand wanting everything at once, its long over due, but I think you were wanting to jump immediately to step 2.
 
So how, exactly, are they going to enforce the lock/disassembled law? Door to door checks? Wouldn't surprise me in DC, but its just not practical.
I had to store a few guns at a friend's house for a while(I live on an Air Force base; no guns) and he requested that they be locked/rendered unfireable. He was doing me a huge favor, so I went with his wishes and pulled the bolt out of the rifle, and trigger locked the pistol. I realized, though, that if you lock it and leave the key in it, it'll fall off pretty easily.
Don't get me wrong, I will never use that trigger lock again, but there are simple ways around the DC law.
 
Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868.

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Click to expand...

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am14
In the legal system of the United States, preemption generally refers to the displacing effect that federal law will have on a conflicting or inconsistent state law. The Supremacy Clause (Article VI, section 2) of the United States Constitution states that The Laws of the United States, (which shall be made in Pursuance to the Constitution), shall be the supreme Law of the land. Thus, when there is a conflict between a state law and federal law, the federal law (subject to the Tenth Amendment and Fifth Amendment and other Constitutional Law) trumps – or "preempts" – the state law, according to this theory. The term is also sometimes used to refer to the displacing effect state laws might have on ordinances enacted by municipalities.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preemption_(law)


:cool:
 
A couple out of the 4 SCOTUS judges who voted aginst the 2nd will probably vote for incorporation as the issue is no longer what the 2nd amendment means but if a constitutionally protected right has to be recognized by the state.
Click to expand...

I'd frankly be surprised if 'justices' who didn't want the right to be enforcible against ANY level of government would have, as their fall back position, that it should be enforcible against ALL levels of government. Rather than taking the position that, if the federal government can't violate it, at least the states should be able to.

I foresee a long line of 5-4 decisions, as the minority fights to keep the right as minimal as possible.
 
If a state doesn't recognize the Constitution of the United States, why is it even allowed to be a part of the country? That seems more like a renegade faction than a legitimate state, to me.

I mean, it is supposed to be one, single country despite differing state laws, right? Or have I gotten it all wrong?
 
I wonder how long it will take them to do balistic fingerprinting of the gun and how long will it take to check every database. This has got to be a 3-5 year process right.:banghead:
 
So let me get this straight, I take my gun in to register it, and the POOOOOLIce will confiscate it so they can Ballistically test it in case it might have been used in a Crime.
That may take weeks or months, no idea.

So they confiscate my gun and they dont know when they will give it back.

sounds like they are compliing to me,

NOT
 
just goes to prove that 'gun control' advocates aren't about law and order....they are about control and power.

And now that a little thing like the law is standing in the way of them pushing forward with the agenda that got them into power (by pandering to the ignorant sheeple they have successfully frightened with their rhetoric) they'll just have to blow off the SCOTUS.

Go figure!
 
By bringing Heller in Washington, DC any questions about the 10th amendment are moot.
The question (like registration) was NOT before the court.

While 'incorparation' may be a strange legal policy, it IS how the rights and liberties recognized by the Federal Constitution have been imposed against the states.

Scalia has gotten as close as he probably could and keep the majority together in Heller.
Additional cases will now move forward to establish the boundaries of the 2nd, just as they have over many years for the 1st.

NONE of our rights are without limit.

"The choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either. There is danger that, if the court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact."

Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949), Robert H. Jackson dissenting.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
to say that "this could get interesting" is something of an understatement
Replies
12
Views
1K
El Rojo
E
R
  • Locked
DC rejects Heller`s 2nd attempt to register handgun
Replies
1
Views
527
Jeff White
J
K
  • Locked
Heller Part II
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
crotalus01
C
yokel
  • Locked
New lobbying group seeks to loosen D.C. gun law
Replies
5
Views
510
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
Z
  • Locked
DC's new anti-gun plan
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
lawson4
lawson4
Back
Top