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

Skip to comments.

SAS ANNOUNCES AMICUS BRIEF IN HELLER
Second Amendment Sisters, Inc. ^ | 11/26/2007 | Genie Jennings, SAS Spokesperson

Posted on 11/26/2007 1:22:24 PM PST by 2nd amendment mama

FROM THE SECOND AMENDMENT SISTERS
900 R.R. 620 S
Suite C101, Box 228
Lakeway, TX 78734
World Wide Web: http://www.2asisters.org
==============================
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 11/20/07
==============================
For additional information contact:
Genie Jennings, SAS Spokesperson
Phone: 877-271-6216
E-mail: saspress@2asisters.org
==============================
Lakeway, TX –

SAS ANNOUNCES AMICUS BRIEF IN HELLER

Second Amendment Sisters is pleased and proud to announce that we are joining South East Legal Foundation in filing an amicus brief in the Supreme Court hearing of Washington, D.C. v. Heller. We are particularly interested in the benefits of firearms in self-defense for women, the elderly and the disabled.

SAS has watched this case closely, since it was originally prepared as Parker v. Washington, D.C. The successful outcome of that case in the lower court was heartening to all who believe in the Second Amendment and in the basic human right of self-defense.

The city’s 1975 handgun ban has made it impossible for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves and their families within the confines of their own domiciles. If this prohibitive law is found unconstitutional, for the first time in three decades residents of the nation’s capitol will be allowed to have an effective means of protection within their homes.

This case does not address carrying a firearm, either concealed or openly, on the streets of the city. It does not address the legality of the city to control the use of firearms in the city. It addresses the constitutionality of the city to override the Second Amendment rights of individuals to keep and bear arms.

Second Amendment Sisters believes that self-defense is a basic human right. We have a right to life; we have a right to defend that right and the rights of those around us; we have a right to the means to do so.

If we are denied the means to defend our life, we are effectively denied our right to life. For over thirty years the citizens of Washington, D.C. have been denied the right to a means of protecting their lives, and thereby denied their basic human right to life.

We are confident in a positive outcome to the Supreme Court hearing. Individual rights are important to both conservative and liberal judges.

Second Amendment Sisters is a grassroots organization dedicated to preserving the individual basic human right to self-defense.

###


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: amicusbrief; banglist; constitution; heller; parker; sas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 last
To: 2nd amendment mama; Joe Brower

BTTT


41 posted on 11/27/2007 8:53:26 AM PST by EdReform (The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed *NRA*JPFO*SAF*GOA*SAS*RWVA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpseal; TexasCowboy; AAABEST; Travis McGee; Squantos; Shooter 2.5; wku man; SLB; ...
SASsy ping!

Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!

42 posted on 11/27/2007 8:56:15 AM PST by Joe Brower (Sheep have three speeds: "graze", "stampede" and "cower".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Squantos
Whats he up too ?

Putting up a token protest to the Citigroup Abu Dhabi deal last I checked :)

43 posted on 11/27/2007 8:58:44 AM PST by mewzilla (In politics the middle way is none at all. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama

Good for you all.

Go get em!


44 posted on 11/27/2007 9:00:11 AM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (I am a proud anti-invasion racist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

I thought that too.


45 posted on 11/27/2007 9:29:25 AM PST by wastedyears (One Marine vs. 550 consultants. Sounds like good odds to me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama
nation’s capitol will be allowed

In the nation's capital, not "capitol." Capital is the city. Capitol is the building in the capital in which laws are promulgated.
46 posted on 11/27/2007 9:53:06 AM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
That's been corrected on our site Second Amendment Sisters. In fact, there are a few other changes that we've made to this original press release. It was posted here before being sent out to the press!!!
47 posted on 11/27/2007 11:19:22 AM PST by 2nd amendment mama ( www.2asisters.org | Self defense is a basic human right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: mombrown1

“The SU Supreme Court has repeatedly spoke to the Second Amendment as securing an individual right to bear arms.

In modern times: U.S. v. Miller (appearing to hold that if an arm was in common use and suitable for militia duty it was exempt from federal tax stamp requirements;”

The very fact that *Miller* was decided on the merits means a LOT. The USSC doesn’t like to decide cases, especially political issue cases, and denies cert. in something like 99% of all filings. The Court could easily have said, “Miller failed to state a claim, cert. denied.” This would be identical to the Silviera v. Lockyer case, in which the 9th Circus said that the 2nd isn’t about individual rights, therefore no individual can bring a case. No, in Miller the case was decided with the assumption that Miller had a 2nd Amendment RKBA, and the specific issue decided was whether the gun he had was protected by the 2nd. Of course, the decision was non-sensical:

“In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.”

That short barreled shotguns were useful to the military was beyond question - they were known as “trench brooms” in WW1, which occurred only about 20 years previously. Under Miller, we’d all have the right to go out and purchase a full auto M16 or M4.

Here’s a great link for a discussion on Miller: http://www.rkba.org/research/miller/Miller.html


48 posted on 11/27/2007 12:37:43 PM PST by Ancesthntr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama
It was posted here before being sent out to the press!!!

Cool!
49 posted on 11/27/2007 1:07:25 PM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama

bump 4 sexy 2a mamas :-)


50 posted on 11/27/2007 10:40:35 PM PST by SteveH (First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 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