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

Skip to comments.

Can DC Legally Stop Residents From Owning Handguns? (SCOTUS amicus brief)
History News Network ^ | 1/28/08 | Jack N. Rakove et al.

Posted on 01/28/2008 8:39:17 AM PST by kiriath_jearim

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-167 next last
To: Pistolshot
Pistolshot said: "Miller was narrowed to the provisions of a sawed-off shotgun/militia argument and opened the door to regulation of machine guns, silencers, et al,"

That's not really true. Obviously, machine guns and most of the items covered under NFA 34 ARE the types of arms useful to a militia. The Miller decision was simply ignored, not broadened, to include such arms.

41 posted on 01/28/2008 11:34:43 AM PST by William Tell (RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68
Niteranger68 said: "There is much less of a constitutional guarantee on the right to possess ammo than there is firearms. "

Not so. A rifle without ammunition is not a "firearm" it is just a club. If the Second Amendment protects the keeping and bearing of rifles, then it protects the keeping and bearing of the ammunition for them.

42 posted on 01/28/2008 11:42:11 AM PST by William Tell (RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68
>I would no more "hide" my guns from the Feds than I would my speech or my religion, although I understand your concern.<

This will all start off as a safety compliance HAZMAT type affair and grow from there.

What's happening in England is just their test bed to see how well the people comply with new regulations.

I am fairly sure that someday in the near future that all gun collections will have to be registered. Just what will comprise a 'gun collection' I have no idea. If the feds have a database that shows them that you own X number of guns, then you could expect an annual regulation compliance visit by authorized local anti-gun inspection "volunteers."

43 posted on 01/28/2008 11:42:59 AM PST by B4Ranch (( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share." ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
This weekend I had an individual wearing a "I support Ron Paul' t-shirt buying an old Mosin-Nagant. Of course he had to fill out the 4473, and do the NICS check, but he was very adamant about getting a copy of the 4473.

When I explained that copies are prohibited, he became very irate about 'governement registration'.

I explained that 4473 was kept in the store archives for BATFE inspections. There was no 'registration' other than the NICS number showing that , yes, you bought a long gun from a legitimate dealer.

I asked where he got the idea that the 4473 was a 'registration' and he replied that his friends had told him, now the governement would be able to find you.

I wound up cancelling the purchase because he raised such a fuss.

44 posted on 01/28/2008 11:52:22 AM PST by Pistolshot (Those with a lively sense of curiosity learn something new every day of their lives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
B4Ranch said: ...an annual regulation compliance visit by authorized local anti-gun inspection "volunteers."

Such "volunteers" would be woefully underpaid for performing such a hazardous job. You just never know when you are going to run across some "gun nut" with unpopular opinions regarding the meaning of the Second Amendment.

45 posted on 01/28/2008 11:54:21 AM PST by William Tell (RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot
Pistolshot said: "I wound up cancelling the purchase because he raised such a fuss."

There is no doubt in my mind that the combination of the 4473s and the inventory records that FFLs are required to maintain constitute a distributed registration of all new firearms sold.

As various FFLs go out of business, their records are turned over to the BATFE. As this progresses, the database will be centralized and not distributed.

46 posted on 01/28/2008 11:59:39 AM PST by William Tell (RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: kiriath_jearim
What is ironic as hell is the fact that these 'scholars' are relying on papers for the basis of their argument which are form the very country that we fought for 7 years to escape from.

Any particular reason we should use the English examples of laws when they are the very people that we fought in order to gain our freedom???

47 posted on 01/28/2008 12:01:35 PM PST by Centurion2000 (It's only arrogance if you can't back it up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
What an incredible argument.

This is a common characteristic shared by every last argument in favor of the DC ban.

48 posted on 01/28/2008 12:04:23 PM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
If not, then not. DC ban stays put, they weasel an opinion to cover their asses, and a bunch of fringe "gun nuts" start "voting from the roof tops" as new gun control legislation is penned in half the States in the Union.

"Fringe," you say?

Only if the Founders, including the Second President of the United States, were "fringe."

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

But there's no real point in worrying about that, as given the long history of the Supreme Court's discussion of the Second Amendment, it's extremely unlikely that your scenario will come to pass.

49 posted on 01/28/2008 12:07:27 PM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: William Tell

I confident that they would be trained that if the ‘holder’ showed any signs of resistance they were to leave the premises immediately and report the situation to the local SWAT team who would then bring his Team to demand compliance.


50 posted on 01/28/2008 12:12:15 PM PST by B4Ranch (( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share." ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: kiriath_jearim

They can’t legally do it.
But governments have taken many of our rights away illegally. They do it a little at a time, so that one day we wake up and we are in the soviet union.


51 posted on 01/28/2008 12:13:01 PM PST by Leftism is Mentally Deranged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
Not so. A rifle without ammunition is not a "firearm" it is just a club. If the Second Amendment protects the keeping and bearing of rifles, then it protects the keeping and bearing of the ammunition for them.

Legally speaking, I disagree. As far as I know, firearm laws rarely make the distinction between loaded and unloaded. When I buy a firearm, it is never loaded, but I must still show my permit. I can not legally conceal-carry in a restricted area just by dumping my rounds. If I jack-up a liquor store with an unloaded pistol, the law won't treat it as a club.

Don't get me wrong. I believe the framers meant for arms and ammo to be one in the same, but those who would disarm us won't follow that logic and we need to be ever vigilant.

52 posted on 01/28/2008 12:15:07 PM PST by Niteranger68 (Either order from the menu or go open your own restaurant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
I am fairly sure that someday in the near future that all gun collections will have to be registered. Just what will comprise a 'gun collection' I have no idea. If the feds have a database that shows them that you own X number of guns, then you could expect an annual regulation compliance visit by authorized local anti-gun inspection "volunteers."

I agree that the Bloomers in our country would love to do this, but I doubt they will ever have the monetary resources to pull it off. It's not a job for volunteers.

53 posted on 01/28/2008 12:18:51 PM PST by Niteranger68 (Either order from the menu or go open your own restaurant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
I hope not. I don't want my children living through a Civil War.

I'm hoping for the best, but planning for the worst.

54 posted on 01/28/2008 12:27:52 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68
The right to keep and bear ARMS. Not just "firearms", not just "pistol shot", not just "heavy rocks". If it is a component comprising an "arm", then its ownership, lawful usage, and bearing of said arms is a Protected Right.

And yes, this would include ammunition and production of said arms as well.

55 posted on 01/28/2008 12:31:09 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
The right to keep and bear ARMS. Not just "firearms", not just "pistol shot", not just "heavy rocks". If it is a component comprising an "arm", then its ownership, lawful usage, and bearing of said arms is a Protected Right. And yes, this would include ammunition and production of said arms as well.

I like and agree with your view, but I don't see it being adopted by those who want to disarm us all.

56 posted on 01/28/2008 12:36:29 PM PST by Niteranger68 (Either order from the menu or go open your own restaurant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68
Do we really care what they think? IMO, they should all be tried under RICO, USC Title 18 Sect 241/242, and in cases where legislated non-access to arms has caused a disarmed Citizen to be killed, Accessory to Murder charges should be brought.

The gun grabbers actions have gotten more people killed than misapplication of personal self-defense EVER has or ever could.

57 posted on 01/28/2008 12:45:11 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68

>It’s not a job for volunteers.<

The volunteers would do the local inspections. Somebody like Soros could use his pull to get it going through our Congress. Wait until after the REAL ID Plan is imposed then watchout.


58 posted on 01/28/2008 12:46:45 PM PST by B4Ranch (( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share." ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68

>but I don’t see it being adopted by those who want to disarm us all.<

Where do you think the “downsizing in the number of hunters” starts? Public education schooling can change any society in one generation.

I’m glad my time is drawing to an end because I don’t want to see what I’m afraid my kids will see.


59 posted on 01/28/2008 12:49:56 PM PST by B4Ranch (( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share." ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot
Pistolshot said: "Now, SCOTUS can decide that the 2nd does pertain to all citiens in the DC area, but since the DC area is considered Federal property, the law needs to be addressed by the legislative body that controls the district, not by a city council."

If the Second Amendment protects individuals in DC, then it protects individuals throughout the nation. This has tremendous potential impact on ALL federal laws, as the US brief points out.

Also, if the Supreme Court upholds the DC Circuit decision and it does so because "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" is a fundamental right, then it will be considered by every court in the nation, state and federal as a fundamental, individual right.

If the Supreme Court decides that the right is NOT fundamental, then that also removes the last lingering constraints on non-federal anti-gun states.

You will have to explain to me how the Heller decision can be "narrow". What will keep the decision from applying to other jurisdictions and to other arms?

The only way to get a "narrow" decision is for the Supreme Court to affirm DC WITHOUT COMMENT. But even that provides some support for the DC Court's decision of an individual right subject to strict scrutiny.

60 posted on 01/28/2008 12:58:01 PM PST by William Tell (RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-167 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