Posted on 11/20/2007 10:17:40 AM PST by SmithL
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether the District of Columbia can ban handguns, a case that could produce the most in-depth examination of the constitutional right to "keep and bear arms" in nearly 70 years.
The justices' decision to hear the case could make the divisive debate over guns an issue in the 2008 presidential and congressional elections.
The government of Washington, D.C., is asking the court to uphold its 31-year ban on handgun ownership in the face of a federal appeals court ruling that struck down the ban as incompatible with the Second Amendment. Tuesday's announcement was widely expected, especially after both the District and the man who challenged the handgun ban asked for the high court review.
The main issue before the justices is whether the Second Amendment of the Constitution protects an individual's right to own guns or instead merely sets forth the collective right of states to maintain militias. The former interpretation would permit fewer restrictions on gun ownership.
Gun-control advocates say the Second amendment was intended to insure that states could maintain militias, a response to 18th century fears of an all-powerful national government. Gun rights proponents contend the amendment gives individuals the right to keep guns for private uses, including self-defense.
The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. That decision supported the collective rights view, but did not squarely answer the question in the view of many constitutional scholars. Chief Justice John Roberts said at his confirmation hearing that the correct reading of the Second Amendment was "still very much an open issue."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Narrow focus on DC, and not the rest of the country. All that will change is that DC citizens will be able to purchase handguns under continuing Federal controls. Concealed Carry is another matter entirely.
I would prefer the Second be left alone...period....but that is just me. I know not what the Supreme Court will do...and that is why I am worried.
So, the game is afoot ...
Duh?
One can always tell a liberal socialist news writer.
ITS ALREADY AN ISSUE AND IT IS NOT DIVISIVE!
That debate is a unifier, and it will unify a large block of voters against the liberal socialsits and their wanna be Utopians whose idea of Brave New World is simply wrong, and unattainable.
"Devisive debate" punk low life no count liberal reporting.
Unifying Debate is the accurate term, and don'r forget it.
-—”so”==”do”—
“... whatever the outcome, it will be a whole new world after they make their decision.”
Yup.
There’s another thread based on a different article
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1928424/posts
Both the petitioner and the respondent sought higher court review.
Radio News saying they will hear arguments in May and possible decision this MAY.
If it goes the wrong way it could unite gun owners to vote for a Pro-gun GOP candidate.
or it could be too late to offer a pro-gun candidate....
when more District of Columbians have weapons, the crime will go down. This is a good chance to test that theory. Of course, the majority of the citizens won’t have a gun because of their felony records.
I’m getting a feeling SCOTUS accepted the case thinking of a slit the difference stategy.
--and remembering McCain-Feingold and the eminent domain issue, I too am worried.
It's an election year - everybody will be pro-gun.
“After considering foreign laws to make that decision of course”- aglooka
That is my fear with this decision - because in other opinions (Kelo?) SCOTUS openly cited foreign laws to support the opinion, which is incomprehensible to me.
If you ask me, the Court has already tipped thier hands by substituting "state-regulated" for "well regulated".
They are going to come down on the side of a collective right. The fix is in.
It's difficult to view any other way.
Let's see where this "conservative" court comes down -- the Constitution or tyranny.
This case will force 2nd Amendment views to become a Presidential campaign issue in 2008, something that the news media has managed to stifle for decades.
Not so, there is a split among the circuits - the Supremes traditionally will take a case to resolve the split.
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.