Mara Georges fronting for Richard Daley and the Chicago Gun Grabbers.
Willful ignorance of the Constitution is no excuse, Mara.
1 posted on
07/24/2008 3:05:03 PM PDT by
IncPen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
To: stanley windrush; BartMan1; Nailbiter; Forecaster; Lurker; SJackson; bang_list
2 posted on
07/24/2008 3:05:59 PM PDT by
IncPen
(We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass ...)
To: IncPen
gun ban will follow obama. get ‘em while you can.
3 posted on
07/24/2008 3:07:02 PM PDT by
the invisib1e hand
(bweed'n dee boo bow shaaaboood'n dee feee-oooo!)
To: IncPen
“Georges tells Aldermen the Supreme Courts decision on Washington, D.C.s handgun ban shouldnt apply to Chicago, because previous Supreme Court rulings have said Second Amendment “right to bear arms” doesnt apply to local governments, like Cities. She says D.C. is a federal jurisdiction.”
This is just so ignorant on so many fronts. I'm just amazed at the stupidity of your average dimocRAT. These people are just as dangerous as Al Queda.
To: IncPen
5 posted on
07/24/2008 3:09:51 PM PDT by
savedbygrace
(SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
To: IncPen
Counsel: Confident (Chicago) Gun Ban Will Continue to Kill More Citizens
9 posted on
07/24/2008 3:26:37 PM PDT by
djsherin
To: IncPen
Where did Mara Georges go to law school? Since when can a local government pass a law that trumps the federal constitution? What an idiot.
To: IncPen
Amazing arrogance on the part of the fascist Chicago gun grabbers.
The Constitution applies to ALL of America, including the major cities.
11 posted on
07/24/2008 3:35:29 PM PDT by
july4thfreedomfoundation
(Four members of the U.S. Supreme Court don't understand the words "shall not be infringed.")
To: IncPen
And when it doesn’t hold the city will change two words for close synonyms, call it Revamped and noisily “pass” it to start the process all over again. A new office is created for the lawyers who have to be hired to defend the city’s gun law in court and taxes will have to go up to pay for it.
12 posted on
07/24/2008 3:37:10 PM PDT by
arthurus
To: IncPen
Georges tells Aldermen the Supreme Courts decision on Washington, D.C.s handgun ban shouldnt apply to Chicago, because previous Supreme Court rulings have said Second Amendment "right to bear arms" doesnt apply to local governments, like Cities. She says D.C. is a federal jurisdiction. She may have a point. When was the last time Chicago was a part of America?
13 posted on
07/24/2008 3:37:47 PM PDT by
lowbridge
("I have never learned to fight for my freedom. I was only good at enjoying it" - Van Den Boogaard)
To: IncPen
What he means by "hold", they'll enforce it as a form of government sanctioned terror, and if he wanders through the courts long enough, maybe Barack Hussein Obama will have appointed a Justice or two, and Heller will be overturned. In the meantime, the Law of the Land is the Law of the Land, exclusive of Chicago.
Of course all this litigation costs nothing, the cost being borne by taxpayers who need not be considered.
14 posted on
07/24/2008 3:38:53 PM PDT by
SJackson
(Barack Obama will not be coming to us, I don't know why, Spokesperson US military hospital Landstuhl)
To: IncPen
have said Second Amendment "right to bear arms" doesnt apply to local governments, like Cities.Is this woman a retard>
16 posted on
07/24/2008 3:55:38 PM PDT by
pgkdan
(Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions - G.K. Chesterton)
To: IncPen
Supreme Court rulings have said Second Amendment "right to bear arms" doesnt apply to local governments, like Cities. In other words, she's saying the constitution doesn't apply in cities.
17 posted on
07/24/2008 4:03:03 PM PDT by
Malsua
To: IncPen
Yeah, good luck with that Mara...something tells me the twin anvils of reality and the Bill of Rights are going to provide an entertaining clue by four for the collection of idiots running Chi-Town.
19 posted on
07/24/2008 4:47:16 PM PDT by
Braak
(The US Military, the real arms inspectors!)
To: IncPen
Georges tells Aldermen the Supreme Courts decision on Washington, D.C.s handgun ban shouldnt apply to Chicago, because previous Supreme Court rulings have said Second Amendment "right to bear arms" doesnt apply to local governments, like Cities. So which Supreme Court rulings would those be, counselor?
And under your line of reasoning, the rest of the Bill Of Rights don't apply to local governments either, despite years of SCOTUS incorporation.
What an ignoramus!
20 posted on
07/24/2008 5:03:15 PM PDT by
Virginia Ridgerunner
("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
To: IncPen
Murder, rape and kidnapping must be legal on Federal property then.
No wonder D.C. has such a problem.
21 posted on
07/24/2008 5:54:59 PM PDT by
Shooter 2.5
(NRA - Vote against the dem party)
To: IncPen
I suppose if Chicago would like to secede from Illinois and/or from the Union, then the Heller decision wouldn’t apply. Let’s face it, the rest of the state of Illinois would probably welcome such a move. Maybe DC, SF, NY and LA can leave also. No big loss.
23 posted on
07/24/2008 7:57:15 PM PDT by
ohioarmedneutrality
(Never mess with a Quaker armed with a semi-automatic rifle.)
To: IncPen
City Corporation Counsel Mara Georges has told two City Council committees shes confident Chicagos law will stand. What else would she say? Anything else and like Stalin, Hizzhonor Da Mayar would find someone with who did not exhibit such an "insufficient degree of optimism". (That phrase was actually used by a project manager to my first mentor, who "fired" him from the project. In the end, the mentor was proved correct.)
25 posted on
07/24/2008 10:06:14 PM PDT by
El Gato
("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
To: IncPen; All
Here is the new philosophy by city attorneys: (most of whom are generally incompetent lawyers to start off with. They are political appointees who could not get a job in the real world or are just using the post to further their own political careers)
“Its all legal untill a judge says otherwise”
IOW city attorneys hold to the notion that they do NOT have to look at the constitution (state or federal) or the law untill someone says they can do it. Untill then the city generates history where they can say “see the law is working”. It is akin to the illegal adoption cases where an illegal adopting parent says “we had the kidnapped child so long we get to keep them.”
Instead of working to fix the law (less expensive more popular option), they instead work to presearve the unconstitutional law.
Obviously this lawyer had flunked consitutional law and the whole series of case law that had the bill of rights apply to the states. By her argument slavery is still legal as a state issue.
26 posted on
07/25/2008 4:42:44 AM PDT by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: IncPen
What this Daley lackey is saying in effect is the U.S. Constitution doesn't apply to 'cities'. Know I know Daley thinks he's King but this is 'commit him to a rubber-room stat' stuff.
And IMHO Chicago's 36 pages of gun laws in size 2 font goes a tad beyond any sane person's definition of 'reasonable restriction'.
27 posted on
07/25/2008 5:11:14 AM PDT by
Condor51
(I have guns in my nightstand because a Cop won't fit)
To: IncPen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson