Posted on 06/28/2008 2:22:48 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
The Supreme Court decision overturning the District's handgun ban won't trigger an open season for guns, Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said Friday, because D.C. law still bans all semiautomatic weapons — such as the common 9 mm pistols used by police and the military. Continues...
===============================================================
Have gun, less crime
In response to the startling discovery by the Supreme Court Thursday that the 2nd Amendment exists, Obama at first tried to fake support for the decision, then showed his staggering mastery of clueless-ness with: "What works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne."
The Supremes struck down the District of Columbia's moronic, 32-year-old blanket gun ban, ruling that the 2nd Amendment's language -- "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" -- mysteriously means the people's right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The Amendment's language had always been manifestly clear, but apparently not clear enough for liberals who seem to find clauses spelling out "gay marriage," partial-birth abortion, forced busing, racial quotas and habeas corpus for bin Laden; so libbies -- including four mentally impaired lawyers on the High Court -- are still confused. "An individual now has a constitutional right to own guns," sniffed James Vicini of Reuters, thinking a shiny "new right" had rolled off Scalia's assembly line. From the beginning, the 2nd Amendment was understood by real Americans to be an individual right, so libbies insisted it only applies to state militias that don't exist anymore. The ruling was SCOTUS's first-ever interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and, short of writing the ruling in crayons for liberals, attempted to settle the long-running debate liberals have had with plain English in the Constitution. (Liberals were sure "2nd Amendment" had to mean '2nd class citizenship' for gun owners.)
The doofus mayor of D.C., Adrian Fenty, complained hysterically that "more handguns will lead to more handgun violence." Apparently, the District's gun ban had "worked" so well that around 300 people were being murdered every year by handguns with access to bullets, human hands and car keys.
Liberals were so devastated by the ruling, the poor little dears were even showing signs of moving through the four stages of grief. Denial: Impact of Gun Ruling Limited, Experts Say -- New York Times. Pelosi Says D.C. Should Continue Gun Regulation -- The Hill. Anger: Gun-Control Supporters Show Outrage -- New York Times. Despair: "Sen. Dianne Feinstein says the ruling destroys decades of precedent. 'I think it opens this nation to a dramatic lack of safety,'" (USA Today). Acceptance: "This opinion still allows commonsense gun control laws," said Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign, which argued before the court that this opinion would not allow "commonsense" gun control laws.
Sounding as coherent as ever, Chicago mayor Richard Daley said he didn't know if the court's ruling will affect Chicago's insanely stupid gun ban, then moments later called it "a very frightening decision."
Taking their guidance from staunch gun-control advocates Hitler and Stalin, liberals of Obama/Daley's ilk in Chicago had enacted their own idiotic ban on handguns and, because the ban has been a total failure, have kept it in place for decades. The ban is so strict, the only ones exempt from it are police officers, aldermen and every deadly gang in Chicago.
Liberals had this brilliant idea that the way to solve crime is to make sure only criminals have guns. It's like communism during the Cold War. You'd explained until you were blue in the face that the basket-case Soviet state was a basket-case for a reason, but libbies insisted the way to go was 5-year plans, bureaucrats and gulags -- keys to "prosperity," if only the Soviets hung in there another 75 years. It's working so beautifully in North Korea.
The evidence didn't fit the beloved template, so they ditched the evidence. And judging from the evidence, gun-banning "works" as 'really well' in Chicago as it's "worked" in the propped up basket-case of D.C.
From 1990-1999, Chicago's "reasonable" "commonsense" gun-grabbing resulted in over 8,000 "commonsense" murders, even as crime overall was falling in the rest of America. From 2000-2006, there were nearly 4,000 murders in Chicago -- we need a timetable to withdraw from this civil war now. The gun-grabbers claim that gun control is "working" because there were 628 murders in 2000, whereas last year only over 430 people got murdered.
And as if this wasn't good enough, only 27,308 crimes have been committed in Chicago in the last 30 days; 440,300 crimes in the last 12 months; nearly 82,000 thefts, 26,000 assaults, 25,000 burglaries, 78,000 cases of battery, all accomplished in the last 12 months. Numerous hit-and-run traffic crimes, too. There's "gun violence," so this is "car violence." We need "reasonable" "commonsense" car control!
Big picture-wise, it's been the case for decades that one out of every four "gun murders" occur in New York City, Washington D.C. and Chicago, gun-banning meccas representing under 5 percent of America's population.
Obama says he's always supported the 2nd Amendment since last Thursday morning. Before that, from last November to around February 12, Obama insisted the D.C. gun ban was "Constitutional"; then from February 15 to June 24, Obama declined to take a position on the D.C. gun ban; then on June 25, Obama said he'll wait and see what SCOTUS decides before deciding what his core belief is on the D.C. gun ban; then the next day, Obama disavowed the position he took last November on the D.C. gun ban, insisting it wasn't his position but that of some staffer who was "inartful" in trying to explain Obama's position on the D.C. gun ban. But this mysterious "staffer" fella told interviewer Leon Harris in a forum on February 12 that he supported the D.C. gun ban. Harris kept referring to this "staffer" as Sen. Barack Obama. This is the same chap who was standing behind a podium next to Hillary in the Philadelphia debate back in April, who confessed to moderator Charlie Gibson that he hadn't "listened to the briefs and looked at all the evidence" in the case of the D.C. gun ban. Don't worry, he'll change his mind again when he's delivering his concession speech in November.
Anyway, that's...
My Two Cents...
"JohnHuang2"
Have a great weekend, y’all!
He'll probably make an appeal to a higher court.
Himself.
“...D.C. law still bans all semiautomatic weapons...”
No, it doesn’t.
Some brave Chicago resident needs to hire an attorney-bodyguard, publicly go buy a handgun with attorney at his side, walk out of the gun shop with his purchase and attorney and see if the dingbat daley arrests him. He could be a rich man.
How much does anyone want to be that Mayor Moron and Cluless Chief of Police, will continue to impose every kind of roadblock possible including this one (banning semiautomatics) as well as insisting trigger locks be used as well as other nuisance requirements (must personally appear with weapon and register handguns) etc., until they are taken to court over and over and over.
What do they care, DemoRats live for litigation and after all, its the folk who are paying?
In the meantime, this will have the same affect as continuing the ban as this could take a long time to resolve.
How much does anyone want to be that Mayor Moron and Cluless Chief of Police, will continue to impose every kind of roadblock possible including this one (banning semiautomatics) as well as insisting trigger locks be used as well as other nuisance requirements (must personally appear with weapon and register handguns) etc., until they are taken to court over and over and over.
What do they care, DemoRats live for litigation and after all, its the folk who are paying?
In the meantime, this will have the same affect as continuing the ban as this could take a long time to resolve."
Exactly right. The game plan will be to defy, delay and dissemble until a new liberal majority of the Supreme Court can be empaneled to rule for gun control/prohibition with a new case. Unless there is personal liability against recalcitrant government officials, these tactics will never end.
Hey! Don't mess with me buster. I am.....like.....a 4-star General......and stuff! Just look at my outfits.....like.....shoulder pads! Plus....I got this like....like really really shiny badge......and Everything! Dude, just....like....gaze at all my bling.....and medals and stuff! I like this military thingy so much I even ordered this. Someone said....like....it sort of....violated some 4th Amendment doohickey or thingy....but....like.....who cares?
And on only ONE issue at that. He'll be a human pretzel before November.
Barry will find out before this election is over that those of us that cling to "our Bibles and our guns" are not as dumb as the ones running for political office....
No, it doesn’t.
Right
It's sort of like arguing that "Brown v. Board of Education" forbids segregation in elementary schools but doesn't effect high schools and universities.
Over the next decade we're in for the same type of fights that the civil rights movement fought during after Brown v. Board.
We have to keep fighting for our rights to keep and bear arms until it is recognized that the only "permit" someone should need for concealed or open carry is the Constitution and the courts strike down statutes allowing the states to impose sales taxes on weapons and ammunition.
I would however allow the state to require the registration of any weapon that was towed on state roads. If somebody has to register their boat trailer they should have to register their M777 before they towed it to the range.
Lawsuits have already been filed, no need for someone to risk jail time.
"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
"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
Ask for members and others to contribute to the war effort with a hundred dollar contribution directed specifically at actions to enforce the recent decision.
I'd donate to it.
Cathy, you ignorant slut!
If somebody has to register their boat trailer they should have to register their M777 before they towed it to the range.
The second Amendment says nothing about boats
I do find it interesting that while our Founding Fathers specifically put the 2nd in place in order to prevent oppression from government, the seat of our federal government is one of the few places to actually try to ban guns.
Does that tell us something?
So less common sense = higher intelligence???
I’m all for it...
I feel when I carry, it makes me smarter than the average elected offical that doesn’t understand this basic principle of an unalienable right, which is obviously from a higher authority than any government in the history of modern civilization...
“JH2”, you know the only thing that really happened here was the court reinforced the “individual” right...Then in one fail swoop, the “but” came in allowing the “infringements to generally continue...Which appeased the “reasonable” crowd...
It’s like I said all along...Nothing really would change...
But...
At least the court finally went on record and solidified the individual right issue...
The war rages on...
Good stuff there JH2!!!
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.