Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Second Amendment case headed to Court (DC appeals Parker case to SCOTUS)
SCOTUSBLOG ^ | Monday, July 16, 2007

Posted on 07/16/2007 8:03:08 AM PDT by ctdonath2

Local government officials in Washington, D.C., decided on Monday to appeal to the Supreme Court in a major test case on the meaning of the Second Amendment. The key issue in the coming petition will be whether the Amendment protects an individual right to have guns in one's home.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bang; banglist; guns; scotus; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 421 next last
To: Publius6961

What part of responding to a previous post which had expressed a general ethnic smear don’t YOU understand?


101 posted on 07/16/2007 10:13:12 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

I can’t read those replies, mod removed them. i guess it’s just as well that way.


102 posted on 07/16/2007 10:13:48 AM PDT by Clam Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator

Just read yours. I shall comply. Please check #99.


103 posted on 07/16/2007 10:15:09 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: READINABLUESTATE
The wrong decision in this case would start a civil war.

This decision would only affect the federal government. Unless, the SCOTUS chooses to incorporate the 2nd amendment to apply to the states, then individual states like Illinois are free to do whatever they want regarding gun ownership.

104 posted on 07/16/2007 10:23:26 AM PDT by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mariebl; from occupied ga
You'll have to forgive me if I find that argument less than persuasive.

Mariebl is correct - unless the court incorporates the 2nd amendment, states and local governments are still free to restrict gun ownership anyway they like.

What it could open the door to is more federal legislation.

105 posted on 07/16/2007 10:27:56 AM PDT by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
SCOTUS hasn’t taken any good RKBA cases in 70+ years precisely because there haven’t been any. Each potential case has been clouded by other issues, and doesn’t help that most involved criminals.

Good point. With Scalia and Rhenquist on the court, any case involving a criminal was suspect. Hopefully, with Roberts and Alito, Scalia can be a little more focused on constitutional issues rather than the wants of law enforcement.

106 posted on 07/16/2007 10:33:09 AM PDT by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta

A favorable verdict would open the door to incorporation by recognizing that there is, in fact, an individual right which can and should be incorporated just like the rest.


107 posted on 07/16/2007 10:34:15 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (The color blue tastes like the square root of 0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
A favorable verdict would open the door to incorporation by recognizing that there is, in fact, an individual right which can and should be incorporated just like the rest.

I don't believe that the collective right argument has been the sticking point from incorporating the 2nd though.

108 posted on 07/16/2007 10:42:18 AM PDT by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2

Looks like they’re going for broke. They will LOSE, big time, and Americans will WIN!!


109 posted on 07/16/2007 10:42:45 AM PDT by Pharmboy ([She turned me into a] Newt! in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice
...There is no constitutional right to hunt...

We in Virginia specifically added the right to hunt to the Commonwealth's Constitution back in 2000, but federally there actually is no such right.

110 posted on 07/16/2007 10:44:05 AM PDT by nina0113 (If fences don't work, why does the White House have one?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

Thank you for the information really appreciate your views on this issue.


111 posted on 07/16/2007 10:44:08 AM PDT by Americanexpat (A strong democracy through citizen oversight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

This “old” stuff really sucks, doesn’t it? I guess it’s better than “dead”, though.


112 posted on 07/16/2007 10:46:31 AM PDT by nina0113 (If fences don't work, why does the White House have one?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

True enough, but the decision would still loom large for our side to the good.


113 posted on 07/16/2007 10:46:34 AM PDT by Pharmboy ([She turned me into a] Newt! in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta

If the 2nd is collective, then only the states could file for incorporation - which they don’t care about, so they haven’t.
Only by declaring the 2nd individual can individuals then file to have it incorporated.
No “individual” ruling, no incorporation. SCOTUS ruling favorably on Parker would change that.


114 posted on 07/16/2007 10:46:44 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (The color blue tastes like the square root of 0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: brityank

The Supremes will hear the case, rule against DC, and find some weaselly way to avoid the “individual right” ruling that we all want to see.

They’ll have their cake and eat it too.


115 posted on 07/16/2007 10:48:11 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: nina0113

Not nearly as young as I used to be. Not nearly as old as, God willing, I hope to become. I agree with what I think you are suggesting that, with due humility as to my potential eternal destinations, getting older is preferable to the obvious alternative. For two things, I get to keep posting on FR and voting against Demonrats.


116 posted on 07/16/2007 11:01:22 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: nina0113

AND, May God bless you and yours!


117 posted on 07/16/2007 11:01:57 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2

From your keyboard to God’s ears. (Incorporation of RTKBA)


118 posted on 07/16/2007 11:03:34 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
What will happen is the SCOTUS will affirm the 2nd Amendment right on the DC area. Since DC comes under the jurisdiction of Federal guidelines, and therefore subject to any federal legislation passed, the Supremes will just make the DC area under the same restrictions of BATF rules as everyone else in the country, thereby putting the DC residence under the same 4473 provisions and GCA of 1934 and 1968, and ignore the individual right issue.

The precedent this might set is that municipalities cannot supercede state or federal law to their own ends as far as gun control issues, a la New York City and Chicago.

119 posted on 07/16/2007 11:09:32 AM PDT by Pistolshot (Every woman, who can, should learn to shoot, and carry a gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2

The SCOTUS can weasel out by either refusing to grant cert, leaving the ruling applicable only to DC, or hearing the case and deciding it on a technicality, making it only applicable to DC. Justices Roberts and Alito need to cowboy the f*ck up and decide gun control in favor of the Second amendment once and for all.


120 posted on 07/16/2007 11:15:59 AM PDT by CholeraJoe (Ratzaz! There. I do give one about something.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 421 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson