To: cryptical
Isn't this the first court case stating that the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals? This is absolutely landmark, in that case.
2 posted on
03/09/2007 8:12:06 AM PST by
domenad
(In all things, in all ways, at all times, let honor guide me.)
To: domenad
Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg are going to be greatly disappointed to hear this.
4 posted on
03/09/2007 8:14:07 AM PST by
Alberta's Child
(Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
To: domenad
No. But it is the first in DC.
Kinda makes you wonder if someone finally cracked a history book.
"Laws abridging the natural right of the citizen should be restrained by rigorous constructions within their narrowest limits." --Thomas Jefferson to Isaac McPherson, 1813. ME 13:327
"The whole of the Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals
It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789
16 posted on
03/09/2007 8:17:25 AM PST by
Dead Corpse
(What would a free man do?)
To: domenad
No, this is the second case concluding that the Second Amendment grants individual rights. The other came from Texas, and the Supreme Court declined to review that, the
Emerson case, against a contrary decision from, IIRC, the ever-popular Ninth Circuit.
At some point, the SC will have to take one of these cases, and answer the very question posed in this case.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article: "Rudy Beats Hillary -- End of Story"
39 posted on
03/09/2007 8:24:59 AM PST by
Congressman Billybob
(Please get involved: www.ArmorforCongress.com)
To: domenad
No the 5th circuit ruled the same a while ago. The DC Circut is unusual in that the legal community considers it the SCOTUS jr.
100 posted on
03/09/2007 8:49:44 AM PST by
Colorado Mike
(Lord, help me be the Conservative my enemies think I am.)
To: domenad
>>Isn't this the first court case stating that the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals? This is absolutely landmark, in that case.<<
I think there was a previous circuit court decision.
What amazes me is that they cited the supreme court. You'd think that if there was supreme court precedent this issue would not be subject to lower court debate.
>>"[T]he phrase 'the right of the people,' when read intratextually and in light of Supreme Court precedent, leads us to conclude that the right in question is individual."<<
>>To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms<<
177 posted on
03/09/2007 9:44:03 AM PST by
gondramB
(It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark.)
To: domenad
I think two other courts have made this decision in the past, not that that has stopped those outside their jurisdiction from trying to interpret "the people" as "the state."
Our greatest threat in regard to the 2nd Amendment is not so much the Judicial branch as it is the Legislative branch of our government. The anti-2nd Amendment crowd know the Constitution guarantees us the right and that the courts are not always their reliable allies, thus they chip away at that right through incremental restrictions on exercising that right (time delays, types of firearm and ammunition, the attempt to barcode ammo, the attempt to implement prohibitive costs through taxing ammo, etc.)
210 posted on
03/09/2007 10:06:30 AM PST by
Ghost of Philip Marlowe
(Liberals are blind. They are the dupes of Leftists who know exactly what they're doing.)
To: domenad
Isn't this the first court case stating that the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals? This is absolutely landmark, in that case. Two other courts, the 5th and the 10th have stated that the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals. What makes this case landmark is that this is the first court that has used the 2nd Amendment to strike down an existing gun law. This is huge!
To: domenad
It is at least the SECOND court to rule that the 2nd Amendment confers an Invividual right. A judge in the Texas area ruled similarly about 3-4 years ago, when his divorcing wife tried to use a pre-emptive antigun restaining order against him.
266 posted on
03/09/2007 10:52:07 AM PST by
2harddrive
(...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
To: domenad
Isn't this the first court case stating that the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals?Hardly, but the gun-grabbers have managed to brainwash a lot of 2A defenders into believing there have been no cases upholding the individual right. I would strongly suggest that you READ the Supreme Court's U.S. v. Miller decision, focusing on what the actual holding was, and read up on the circumstances surrounding the fact that its remand to the lower court was never carried out. Gun-grabbers are fond of citing this case as supporting their claims, but in fact it does just the opposite.
To: domenad
They reported this on Brit Hume but did not discuss it much. They showed the Mayor of DC calling the decision an outrage, like he makes any difference in the courts.
If the decision is upheld, it will be huge. People like that crappy Mayor won't be ablle to run roughshod over our gunrights.
To: domenad
The Supreme Court said it in Justice Thomas' opinion in US v. Verdugo - Urquidez, but the remarks were 'dicta.'
599 posted on
03/09/2007 3:54:53 PM PST by
sig226
(see my profile for the democrat culture of corruption)
To: domenad
No.
This is the SECOND Federal Court decision that stated that the right ot keep and bear arms is an individual right - in recent times anyway.
999 posted on
03/10/2007 10:53:50 PM PST by
ZULU
(Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts and guns made America great.)
To: domenad
Isn't this the first court case stating that the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals?Well, THIS century, certainly. Even the last century, the last opinion expressed by the USSC that was narowly "on point" happened in the first third of the 20th century. The Miller case.
1,234 posted on
03/15/2007 5:33:47 AM PDT by
ExSoldier
(Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson