Heller Vs. D.C. 2nd amendment SC case

Well, now that the opening arguments have concluded, what does everyone think?

Personally, I didn't care for how Gura backpedaled on issues such as Machine Guns, Registration, and Trigger-locks. I realize he was attempting to keep the case narrow, and hammer out a niche in the ammendment for inclusion of a self defense interpretation, but I think he isshooting gunownersin the foot. I dont think he had to argue at the expense of the Miller caseand military/militia usefullness to push his.

Regardless of him, I think we stand a good chance of getting a favorable ruling, and likewise, judging from the questioning, I think the ruling may be broaderthan some (myself included) originally expected.

[Lanse couche couche]

Is there already a published summary of the statements made today.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/07-290.pdf

[Lanse couche couche]

Thanks. I am printing the whole thing out now for happy hour reading.

They'll also be reshowing the arguments tonight on C-Span at 8:00 PM EST.

[burniegoeasily]

Got to read, be back. Thanks for the link Magnumman

[DougMD]

I'd like to see some Gore or Kerry voters thank the rest of us for helping to elect someone who put in place justices who are preserving their right to defend themselves and hunt without paying God knows what kind of "registration fees."

[ipscshooter]

Yeah, thought I saw somewhere that gunsmiths who do a little too much work are in danger of being renamed as manufacturers, which carries a "registration fee" of nearly $2,000...

[bergall]

ORIGINAL: ipscshooter

Yeah, thought I saw somewhere that gunsmiths who do a little too much work are in danger of being renamed as manufacturers, which carries a "registration fee" of nearly $2,000...

yes...they have to be careful how much work they do to a firearm. The guys doing the bowen and Linebaugh conversions on the ruger blackhawks come specifically to mind. The're not just tuning piece, they're cutting
the frame and handle, replacing barrells, lengthening cylinders, y'know...extensive modifications. This law
(I don't know if it's a law or just a rumor of something 'coming down the pike') is not so much about making small-time pistolsmiths pay up, it's about putting them out of business so when you S&W gets a cracked forcing cone, you have no place to go other than to S&W.

Thanks Magnum for that transcript link....this is excruciating stuff.....still reading....

[Steve863]

Really interesting reading here. You can tell that Justice Scalia is on the side of the 2nd amendment more than the rest of the judges. The statement that stands out most in my mind was when Justice Stevens asked Gura this question: "Are you, in effect, reading the amendment to say that the right shall not be unreasonably infringed instead of shall not be infringed?" To me that is the basis of the entire 2nd amendment argument. I think that a total ban might be struck down, but state and local laws will continue to have the right to make gun ownership difficult in some areas. The court surely won't decide that anyone should be able to have any type of weapon they want, anywhere they want. Infringements that are reasonable will be viewed as acceptable and even necessary. I think they will make a ruling more to what Justice Stevens was driving at where the right to keep and bear arms CAN be infringed but just not unreasonably. So the DC law may get overturned here, but in general the courts decision won't proclaim that the 2nd amendment is so sacred and that everyone is entitled to possess firearms without any forms of restrictions put on them. Other than overturning the DC law and maybe setting a precedent for future ban attempts, the courts decision won't give gun advocates too much more here. Gun laws and restrictions are here to stay.