...the Washington, DC city council thumbing its nose at the United States Supreme Court gun ban ruling? Isnt there some way the whole bunch can be held in contempt?
Well it's like this. We have liberals ready to thumb their nose at the Supreme Court. We also get reminded we have three branches of government for checks and balances. However, nobody ever challenges those 9 people in robes who we're never elected nor do they ever face and scruntany for their bad decsions. This doesn't mean I disagree with there decsion on the gun ban stuff. It's other stuff I have problems with and right now we have a very limited way to overturn their polical view. I wish they would go back to what their powers/job/office was created for. Up holding OUR CONSTITUTION!
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
For decades DC has been coddling criminals and hamstringing folks who havea God given rightto defend themselves from violent scumbags.The place is an open sewer.
Arresting people that are in comtempt of the law is a good start. They are no differenct then these so-called "Refugee" cities that are springing up on the east and west coast.
__________________
"Banning guns is an idea whose time has come."
- Joseph Biden
Associated Press 11/18/93
"Be thankful that we're not getting all the government we are paying for." Will Rogers
I wish they would go back to what their powers/job/office was created for.
Couldn't that be said of about any federal political office and beyond???
The court struck down the DC ban but it upheld the right of government to limit weapons, I believe. So in answer, DC came up with a new, and similarly rediculous, restriction. I have a feeling it will mean yet another court battle with hopefully the same result although it probably won't get to the high court again. In the meantime (as I have already on here), I encourage all DC residents to flagrantly (and at no personal expense to me) break any new gun restrictions in DC.
__________________
Looney tunes deductive reasoning:
--Me smell Mohican burning
--Me last Mohican
--Must be me!!!
--EEEOOOWWW!!!!!
First of all . . . if you live in Washington DC, maybe that is your first problem and you ought to consider moving away, like maybe to Texas, Colorado, or some other bastion of freedom.
Secondly . . . I say let Washington DC bring it on. If they thumb their noses at the US Supreme Court, I would bet my money the NRA will drag their a$$e$ back into court and bust their balls once again. That sort of thing isn't going to succeed indefinitely.
More interesting is what is going on in other cities such as Chicago which are also thumbing their noses at the recent Supreme Court decision. Or perhaps more charitably, they are not conceding the breadth of the decision -- they are arguing that the decision is limited to what the Federal Government can do (and the Federal Government rules Washington DC) and does not pertain to what states or municipalities do. Again, I say bring it on. Let's get the City of Chicago into court and have the matter submitted to trial. There is no clear precedent as to whether the second amendment does or does not extend to constrain states and/or municipalities -- but definitely several of the civil rights have been extended by the court to apply to states. It seems to me that just as the right to vote may not be supressed by states/municipalities by extension that the right to keep and bear arms would justly be extended similarly. But that is just my opinion.
I think it is a little wasteful of elected officials to be squandering public moneys in the pursuit of their private ideologies of gun rights supression. I hope after they have been smacked down a few times by court decisions that they will see the writing on the wall and quit wasting their constituents's monies.
More interesting is what is going on in other cities such as Chicago which are also thumbing their noses at the recent Supreme Court decision. Or perhaps more charitably, they are not conceding the breadth of the decision -- they are arguing that the decision is limited to what the Federal Government can do (and the Federal Government rules Washington DC) and does not pertain to what states or municipalities do. Again, I say bring it on. Let's get the City of Chicago into court and have the matter submitted to trial. There is no clear precedent as to whether the second amendment does or does not extend to constrain states and/or municipalities -- but definitely several of the civil rights have been extended by the court to apply to states. It seems to me that just as the right to vote may not be supressed by states/municipalities by extension that the right to keep and bear arms would justly be extended similarly. But that is just my opinion.
This is why I find it incredible that there are gun owners on this site and elsewhere who support Obama. We need conservatives on the Court if we are to succeed in the fight to apply the 2nd Amendment to the States. Obama will NOT appoint such judges, and, if he wins he'll likely get to appoint at least two. And, we only won the Heller decision by one vote. McCain has stated he'll support Justices like Alito and Roberts.
I think the DC city council has a good estimate as to how long it takes a case to get thru the court system, so they can just change the law slightly every few years and violate the rights of their citizens for an indeterminate time. Just wait until the learning curve reaches the rest of the country.
More interesting is what is going on in other cities such as Chicago which are also thumbing their noses at the recent Supreme Court decision. Or perhaps more charitably, they are not conceding the breadth of the decision -- they are arguing that the decision is limited to what the Federal Government can do (and the Federal Government rules Washington DC) and does not pertain to what states or municipalities do. Again, I say bring it on. Let's get the City of Chicago into court and have the matter submitted to trial. There is no clear precedent as to whether the second amendment does or does not extend to constrain states and/or municipalities -- but definitely several of the civil rights have been extended by the court to apply to states. It seems to me that just as the right to vote may not be supressed by states/municipalities by extension that the right to keep and bear arms would justly be extended similarly. But that is just my opinion.
This is why I find it incredible that there are gun owners on this site and elsewhere who support Obama. We need conservatives on the Court if we are to succeed in the fight to apply the 2nd Amendment to the States. Obama will NOT appoint such judges, and, if he wins he'll likely get to appoint at least two. And, we only won the Heller decision by one vote. McCain has stated he'll support Justices like Alito and Roberts.
I support Obama because he said the gun ban was constitutional. Oh wait a minute, my bad wrong quote. I support Obama because he believes in the second amendment and believes the court made the right decision in overturning the gun ban because it was unconstitutional.
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
What do you guys think about...
) break any new gun restrictions in DC.
