In another dramatic victory for firearm owners, the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional Chicago, Illinois' 28-year-old strict ban on handgun ownership, a potentially far-reaching case over the ability of state and local governments to enforce limits on weapons.
A conservative majority of justices on Monday reiterated its two-year-old conclusion the Constitution gives individuals equal or greater power than states on the issue of possession of certain firearms for self-protection.
The court, however, said local jurisdictions still retain the flexibility to preserve some "reasonable" gun control measures currently in place nationwide.
Yep. 5-4. I recall some heated debate here when Sotomayor was appointed. One of our members suggested that she was not anti-gun. I said that she would vote against incorporating the 2nd Amendment against the states and therefore she was anti-gun. I said I would apologize if I was wrong Well.... No apologies due. Just a big fat "I told you so." Thankfully, the Socialist gun-grabbers did not prevail. This time.
Yep, Ipsy, you're right. If the prosepctive SCOTUS member looks like an anti-gunner, stinks like an anti-gunner and acts like an anti-gunner then it's a dedicated anti-gunner.
But Kagan will be appointed and then one more liberal commie to vote against gun ownership/
__________________
The great day of the LORD is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the LORD: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly. Zephaniah 1:14
פרץ
But Kagan will be appointed and then one more liberal commie to vote against gun ownership/
Fortunately, she is replacing a liberal commie... So, the philosophical make-up of the Court won't change much. We should all be praying for the long life and good health of Justices Alito, Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas, at least until we can vote the current Communist-in-Chief out of the big house...
This certainly ought to be stored in each gun owner's memory banks for future reference. I just don't get it when people say there is no difference between Republican presidential candidates and Democratic presidential candidates. If nothing else, the kinds of supreme court justices Democrats appoint versus those appointed by Republicans are DRAMATICALLY different. It is interesting to note that this decision is so close. There are 4 justices who are quite comfortable trampling on the second amendment rights of vast numbers of our citizens (to whit, those who live in major cities like Chicago . . . but by extension NY, LA, Houston [oops, that would never happen in Texas where the governor is licensed to carry and has shoot a coyote that foolishly threatened his puppy dog when he is out running], Philadelphia, Pittsburg, Detroit, etc.).
They can see the need to invent rights, like the right of an uncompetitive law school applicant getting a leap around other better qualified applicants based on racial preferences, they can see the need to allow city's to disqualify objective results in tests to determine advancement decisions . . . but they can't see systematic infringement of second amendment rights. How can they have such refined and subtle vision in one case and be absolutely blind in another case? My explanation is NOT very flattering to their honor or their intellectual integrity.
What's sad is this...that it is even being voted on. This should have been laid to rest years ago with the Second Ammendment. However, it is a good victory for us.
__________________
Quit whinin' or quit huntin', they don't go together!! Reese
When they outlaw guns...I'll be an outlaw! Reese
A .380 in your pocket is better than a 45 in the truck! Stolen
"IN GOD WE TRUST"
WTG: SCOTUS. Emperor Daley has said that he does not care what SCOTUS does because he will continue the ban.
I suppose that the dust has not yet settled. Still, when the dust HAS settled, it would seem to be imprudent for a public official to publically declare that he intends to suppress constitutional rights that have been affirmed by the US supreme court. Seems like he might be liable to have himself hauled into court. I know just the well funded non-profit organization to do it, too. No, I know you are thinking about that public spirited redoubtable defender of our civil rights -- the American Civil Liberties Union. No, I wasn't thinking of them. I was thinking of another well funded non-profit organization.
How can a city continue a ban? Citizen has "banned" gun. Citizen is arrested. Citizen goes to trial. Citizen is found innocent in court, by virtue of the law being invalid. Second citizen has "banned" gun. Second citizen is arrested. Second citizen doesn't go to trial -- res judicada, issue has already been settled by a prior judicial decision. Third citizen has J
bannded" gun. Third citizen is arrested. City is sued by a well funded non-profit organization and tons of money are awarded in damages.
At least I imagine something like this to happen. Perhaps I am naieve, but I do assume that we are ruled by law and not by the whims of an autocrat.
Mayor Daley ought to be imprisoned if he directs the PD to arrest a citizen for violating this overruled law. Lawsuits are okay but prison gets their attention much quicker and it's far more personal.
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
In dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer predicated far-reaching implications. "Incorporating the right," he wrote, "may change the law in many of the 50 states. Read in the majority's favor, the historical evidence" for the decision "is at most ambiguous."
This dissenting opinion from a Justice who has said that Boy Scouts should be required to accept gay scoutmasters and that "Roe v. Wade" is "settled law." His idea of ambiguous is laughable and his idea of the way things ought to be is disgusting.
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
SCOTUS Strikes Chicago Handgun Ban
