The Big Heller Decision Discussion Thread - AFFIRMED 2ND AS INDIVIDUAL RIGHT

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think that having an individual right fully enshrined, as well as a prohibition against categorical bans of a class of arms (i.e. this should put an end to the grabber dream of banning handguns) is a pretty big win. We're now out of the woods of the old "Why does anyone need a gun" and into fighting bad regulations from a solid footing. We also have self-defense recognized as a legitimate right, this ends the old "guns are just for hunting and target shooting" arguement.

I don't think any of us really thought Heller would open the doors to anything and everything, and I don't see us losing anything, but gaining quite a bit.

Also, don't forget that machineguns are not actually banned. If you got the right lawyer I think you could leave the NFA in place while attacking the post-86 restriction, effectively opening up the registry without making it seem like your allowing machineguns of anyone and everyone. We could learn from the anti crowd on sneaky legislation like this.
 
An ironic thing I just realized. I don't think that EBR were in common usage before the AWB. Because of the AWB the want for EBR escalated. And with the ending of the AWB are now in common use. So we have the original AWB to thank for staving off future AWB.
 
The narrowness of this ruling means we will have to keep up the pressure on the political front. If we want nation-wide concealed carry and an end to the machine gun ban, we will have to continue to fight for them.
Click to expand...

Actually, Scalia sold us down the river on NFA items. There's almost zero chance of getting rid of the machine gun registration ban now. It also leaves open the ability for Congress to ban *anything* new as long as they do it early enough that the guns don't become "common."

Kiss your 50 cals goodbye. Anyone who doesn't own or have a deposit down on a 50 should probably get one yesterday.

The only people this really buys anything for (likely) are the states with open-carry bans, and places like NY and Chicago that effectively ban guns through draconian registration ordinances.

It does seem to take another AWB off the table, so that, at least, is good.
 
It seems to me as though we kicked ass, but have yet to take names. sounds good ot me!
 
so when can the people in DC actually take their pistols out of the closet and dig them up in the back yard and rightfully place them next to the nightstand?
Click to expand...

No time soon... they are not registered
 
Just about everything Scalia has said and done since and including Bush v. Gore, Haich v. US, etc., has proven that is a legal hack and political whore to his party and special interests attached thereto.

So therefore it comes as no surprise that how he would "interpret" the 2A is 180 degrees directly opposite from the the 2A is actually about, to please his R party masters. The 2A is about ensuring that the citizens have the very *same* arms as those in the hands of standing military. He interprets the 2A to be those arms which are NOT commonly used in the military. It's a devastating loss, in truth (relative to the the true meaning of the 2A), and paves the way for virtually any type of ban or restriction that comes down the pike. The circular reasoning is indeed absolutely absurd and nonsensical, as pointed out by the dissent. The ONLY reason short-barreled shotguns are not common is because they're highly burdensome due to the '34 Act. So it's ridiculous to say that banning them is OK since they're not commonly used. I for one would use about a 12 incher for home defense but for NFA '34.

Curse ye George Bush I, for appointing Souter, Curse ye Gerry Ford for appointing Stevens, Curse ye American people for putting Clinton in office to appoint Ginsburg and Breyer, and most of all curse ye Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts for not standing up for the obvious truth as evidenced by the history and text. To a lesser extent, ditto to Kennedy.

Make no mistake - the camel's nose is under the tent, and if any more D. Party POTUS's get in office, we're doomed. The only bright side of this is, nothing could possibly make clearer why Obama the happy gun-banner MUST - MUST be defeated. McCain MUST win this election, or we're dead meat since we're sitting on a razor-thin 5-4 and that margin doesn't really even protect ANYTHING, except the extrordinarily narrow limited circumstance of using "a" "handgun" in the "home" for "self-defense".

A very shallow, hollow, short-lived "victory" indeed. :mad:
 
I suspect the next argument becomes "Equal Protection" where restrictions are unreasonable. In many ways, I see the ruling opening more new challenges than closing current ones. The future will be exciting. :)

Doc2005
 
Would you prefer a 5-4 reversal of Heller?



well, obviously no... but i would have rather not had them tell us what we can and cant own based off of a "military rifle" or "common use". its a bs copout.
 
Scalia is saying as clearly as humanly possible that a 922(o) challenge is dead on arrival.
Click to expand...

I haven't read the whole thing yet, but I don't think that's necesarrily what he is saying. In order to get five clean votes, this opinion had to be as narrow as possible. I think he is just making clear that this opinion only applies to complete bans on firearms in common use for self-defense and no more. So far what I've read leaves open the door for additional challenges to broader restrictions.

Now the PSA: This was a very narrow ruling by the scantest of majorities. Kennedy will most likely not be the 5th vote for a repeal of 922(o). If you ever want to own a MG, and if you ever want to see a state AWB overturned, you damn well better get your ass out there in November and vote for whoever you think is most likely to appoint the right judges.
 
Read this:

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful
in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be
banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely
detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said,
the conception of the militia at the time of the Second
Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens
capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of
lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia
duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as
effective as militias in the 18th century, would require
sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at
large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small
arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and

tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited
the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the
protected right cannot change our interpretation of the
right.
Click to expand...
 
If you ever want to own a MG, and if you ever want to see a state AWB overturned, you damn well better get your ass out there in November and vote for whoever you think is most likely to appoint the right judges.
Click to expand...
make that someone who has a chance of getting enough electoral votes to win and is more likely to appoint the right kind of judges.
 
Regarding AWB and 50 Caliber verses "Common Use"....


Guys, you have to remember... as I see it, this is national.

If you live in a state that restricts EBRs, SBR's/SBR's, .50 calibers, etc., you are affected by those of us in free states.

The higher "common use" in our states could be used to prevent those bans on a federal level.

While I wasn't looking at a .50 caliber, I may just have to get one ... for common usage.


-- John
 
If you live in a state that restricts EBRs, SBR's/SBR's, .50 calibers, etc., you are affected by those of us in free states.

The higher "common use" in our states could be used to prevent those bans on a federal level.

While I wasn't looking at a .50 caliber, I may just have to get one ... for common usage.
Click to expand...

Was this a solicitation for donations? ;)
 
So the states that require a reason for a CCW, can we now put self-defense??
Click to expand...

Exactly what I'm looking to find out....to me (NY), this is HUGE.

I'm far from a legal expert but, Scalia seems to be saying that every legally qualified INDIVIDUAL (not a felon, not mentally unstable etc) has a protected RIGHT to Keep (own) and Bear (carry) arms.
 
Actually, Scalia sold us down the river on NFA items. There's almost zero chance of getting rid of the machine gun registration ban now. It also leaves open the ability for Congress to ban *anything* new as long as they do it early enough that the guns don't become "common."

Kiss your 50 cals goodbye. Anyone who doesn't own or have a deposit down on a 50 should probably get one yesterday.
Click to expand...

Yep. That’s my trouble. We did win but lost a fundamental argument about the 2nd. It is now official that it's an individual right, but also official that it has little to do with protecting the constitution as a whole. We can't use weapons that we don't already have and any new ones can be taken from us quickly enough to prevent us from having them in common use.

Government just made sure it can stay in power illegally and there is little, by way of force of arms, we can do about it.

You guys can celebrate. I don't think I can. The 2nd amendment just became about Duck Hunting and Home Defense, not about protecting our rights.
 
Our enemies our now completely on the defensive and are reacting.
Click to expand...
This is well evidenced on the Brady Campaign site. As soon as the ruling came out, they changed their front page to one soliciting donations to defend gun laws, and Paul Hemke's statement says "The Heller decision, however, will most likely embolden criminal defendants, and ideological extremists, to file new legal attacks on existing gun laws. With the help of the Brady Center’s legal team, those attacks can, and must, be successfully resisted in the interest of public safety." They're scared, big time.
 
I am listening to these jokers on CNN, they are saying that the S Court is reasonable because on one side that it is in individual right but on the other, an ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN IS ALSO REASONABLE. So there you go, I think we are still gonna see a resurrection of that bloody beast. On the news, they are already talking of bans. So right when I am feeling good they got to rip my high away and try to depress me.....
Click to expand...

This is why I never watch CNN or MSNBC.Even Fox can be hard to take at times but at least there is some rationale there.
Don't be depressed.A narrow win is better than a atrocious loss.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Z
  • Locked
High Court’s Big Ruling For Gun Rights
Replies
5
Views
889
Sam1911
S
D
  • Locked
Was Heller Insignificant?
Replies
18
Views
828
LaBulldog
L
E
  • Locked
Summary of positive effects of Heller
Replies
2
Views
434
everallm
E
W
  • Locked
The Three Steps In Heller vs D.C:SCOTUS'S Crucial Answers
Replies
0
Views
378
Winchester 73
W
J
  • Locked
The Impact of Heller on the Illinois State Legislature
Replies
2
Views
463
Geneseo1911
G
Back
Top