Posted on 09/11/2013 6:10:29 PM PDT by marktwain
After the historic decision where the Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms applied to individuals in the Heller decision, the victorious attorney Alan Gura filed another suit in the District of Columbia. The object of this lawsuit was simple: Require the D.C. government to allow a person to carry a handgun for defense outside of the home. From the The Washington Times:
The lawsuit argues that the Districts laws, customs, practices and policies generally banning the carrying of handguns in public violate the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It asks that the District issue licenses to carry guns in public to legal gun owners in the city and to people with valid carry permits from outside the city.
Alan Gura went first. He said this case is pretty simply (sic). He emphasized the Heller decision's definition of bear as to carry on the person a weapon for offensive or defensive use in the event of confrontation. He pointed out that the District has offered no other definition. He pointed out that this is a complete ban on carrying outside the home and is thus very similar to Heller which completely banned possession of handguns. He pointed out that handguns are protected under the second amendment as commonly used arms. He explained that Heller said that the right of self defense is protected by the second amendment and that the DC law bans persons from having handguns for self defense outside the home.
This delay is intentional. Why, you ask? It is because there is no States rights issue in the Federal Disttrict (sic) to balance againmst (sic) the rights of citizens. Delaying this case, and bringing only flawed other cases to SCOTUS means they are playing the waiting game. Wait until one of the 5 conservatives dies, then bring in cases to roll back Heller.Four years is a long time for a simple ruling. Perhaps this is a "hot potato" that the judges do not want their name attached to. Perhaps they have hoped for another case in the courts to overtake this one and render it moot.
We used to be a lot quicker in our justice system. Then we noticed that bad people were getting the short end of ther stick, so we slowed the whole thing way down.
Mark, I’m thinking that it’s getting time to man up and admit that the gun control issue is about black violence and the gun grabber crowd doesn’t want blacks walking around with legally concealed firearms.
DC is heavily populated with blacks, as is , NYC, L.A., Chicago and Oakland. The mayors of those cities certainly must toss and turn all night long trying to figure out how to keep guns out of the hands of the city residents. They need to talk to Governors from Arizona, Alaska, Wyoming, New Hampshire to learn the truth about guns.
Shamefully indicative that the federal courts are corrupt. The fish rots from the head down.
Maybe it is time to start a vigorous debate on what Amendments are indicated when enough states pass legislation calling for a Convention. The mere discussion will drive the left (er, “progressives”) crazy and frantic.
Missouri has a “knock-out” or “retention” vote on each judge periodically. If a judge has been objectionable, voters have the chance to remove them from office. It is time to revamp the federal courts and to allow the States to overturn outrageous rulings like ObamaCareTax and Kello.
Mark, Im thinking that its getting time to man up and admit that the gun control issue is about black violence and the gun grabber crowd doesnt want blacks walking around with legally concealed firearms.
The simple fact of the matter is that all so-called "gun control" laws have always been founded upon the unwillingness of self-appointed "better" people, most white, to allow non-white people to keep and bear arms.
The first "gun control" laws, written long before there was a United States, were adopted specifically to prohibit black slaves and Indians from having anything to do with guns. To this day, "gun control" laws are adopted first and last because people are terrified at the thought of young, male, unmarried people of color walking around with guns. You'll never hear self-proclaimed "liberals" or "progressives" admit a single word of that, but if you trace the history of "gun control," you'll notice each new exercise of it coincides perfectly with upwellings of fear of armed non-white young males.
It really is exactly that simple.
Asaad is calling for drone strikes to enforce the international “norm” for bearing arms.
Doesn't add up. If they were only doing wrong things in local ordinances, and leaving us out in the free part of the country alone, we'd probably leave them alone. But they keep trying to infringe on our rights on a national level. If their concern is only in the cities, which they control anyway, why the attempts to screw with the rest of us?
They are hoping a conservative will die first so they can put another Commie on the SCOTUS. I’m praying to the Lord that all conservatives SCOTUS members live another 3 years.
Not that it matters. Hillary will be elected in 2016 and appoint equally communist members.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.