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.
In which event they will have earned it.
What do you have against MIller?
All Miller says is that only "militia" weapons are protected, and a good case could be made (should have been made) that almost any weapon could be a "militia" weapon.
They can take my gun from a large pile of empty brass.
“Kiss our weapons goodbye!”
You get lost? DU is over that away!
Remember, we have guns, and they don’t. They will be fools if they think they can win that kind of civil war. Then they will be dead. Probably some of us, too, but freedom has never been free.
So it's 11-1 against.
Imagine, you trolling here again. As expected. I see you have been ignored so far, good.
I have posted this to you before, and since you are so damn tiresome, I'll post it again, and you will ignore it again. Your 11-1 is based on one lie resting on another. "Precedent", yes. Honest jurisprudence, no. In fact you never address the racist roots of gun control in the US. Before they tried to keep "negros" from having guns, no one questioned the right of citizens (the "people", 'member?) to own and carry guns.
http://www.constitution.org/2ll/schol/gun_control_dencite.htm
Keep pounding away though.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
And the Model 12 could be fired by holding the trigger down and racking the pump... Fun to shoot for pleasure, and I imagine a very useful feature in trench warfare. Know next to nothing about the Model 97.
What bonehead doesn’t understand that there is really no other way to possess a gun except in your own... possessions?
Where else could you “have” them?
Stupid IMO to go the SCOTUS route. I see a major victory for us unless the court sidesteps the issue in a typical lawyerly fashion.
Quick, what does that mean?”
I think I like the way you think...
I hope they go further than to just rule that you have a right to keep a firearm in your home. To rule so narrowly would be to ignore the part that says we can keep AND bear arms.
I can tell you what would have happened, Alito and Roberts would have been two liberals to the left of Stalin and Stevens would have retired and allowed the ‘Rats to put a young liberal on as a replacement and we would have been ROYALLY screwed for the next 30 years.
The Second Amendment is the teeth of the Constitution. Pull those teeth and give the government an absolute monopoly on power and NONE of the Constitution means anything.
Please, not on this thread. (Surely I need not elaborate.)
Not precisely. On one side, it would be an attempt at a coup d' etat, with the final step in assuming extraconstitutional power and rendering the document from which legitimate governmental authority flows moot and invalid.
On the other, it would simply be self-defense against a criminal gang, better equipped and better clothed than most, but with no more legal authority to govern than any biker gang or drug cartel- and deserving of exactly the same respect and support.
But it's quite possible that at least one side- and maybe both- would be less interested in attempting to wrest full control over all 50 states, then trying to wrap itself in the burnt charred remains of the ripped American flags that remain. During the XX Century Finnish Civil War, the Finns killed off about 1% of their population in a war that lasted but four months; during our War Between the States/ War of Yankee Dominance, we managed to kill about 2% of the US population, but only over 4-plus years. And in the Finnish example, only about a quarter could be considered *combat* deaths; the rest were executions or cases of those in prison simply allowed to freeze to death. Practical, those Finns.
In any event: between 1% and 3% of the US population of 301,139,947, [July 2007 U.S. Pop. est.]- well, you do the math.
Accordingly: CWII ping list PING!
On the other, it would simply be self-defense against a criminal gang, better equipped and better clothed than most, but with no more legal authority to govern than any biker gang or drug cartel- and deserving of exactly the same respect and support.
Exactly so. And good to hear from you archy, as always.
BTW, tagline, courtesy of ovrtaxt
The thing that everyone needs to remember is that most of the cops and a good portion of the military would just follow what ever the State tells them to.
So even if a gun ban results from this case (which is what I fear), I doubt that many will do much to protest. I know the NRA won’t.
bookmark
I dunno. I'd like a nice conservative zone for something as important as this. One more of the Lib judges to quietly retire and for us to get one more conservative. Just in case one of our wishy washy Justices goes a little bit south, Kennedy has been known to swing to the left and Souter clearly is a Leftie although he was sold as the opposite. I'd really like to see Ruth depart the High Court.
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.