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

To: guitarplayer1953

This is just another seed planted for the eventual destruction of the 1968 GCA. Heller had to be denied a license to own a handgun in order to reach the US Supreme Court to vindicate his constitutional right to own one. I’m not particularly worried about a corrupt North Carolina circuit court decision.


31 posted on 08/21/2008 8:45:22 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: mvpel
another seed planted for the eventual destruction of the 1968 GCA.

...

Justice delayed is Justice denied...It is now 40 years since the 1968 GCA. It was as wrong then as it is now. I was a child then, now my children are adults. It has been 74 years since the 1934 NFA was enacted. My grandfather was a young man then, now his great-grand-children are adults. It would seem this infringment has gone on for more than a lifetime.

Maybe, with Patience, this will all be unraveled when my great-grandchildren are adults.

32 posted on 08/21/2008 9:06:55 AM PDT by no-s
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: mvpel; Centurion2000
This is just another seed planted for the eventual destruction of the 1968 GCA. Heller had to be denied a license to own a handgun in order to reach the US Supreme Court to vindicate his constitutional right to own one. I’m not particularly worried about a corrupt North Carolina circuit court

Definitely grounds for appeal considering that the Heler decision even went so far as to mention that Miller may have to be revisted.

All of those on this thread and elsewhere who are worrying about this decision, or who are saying that Heller was a sell-out or a win for the gun-ban crowd are simply wrong - and should chill out a bit so that they can understand the process.

The law of the land in this regard is stated in Heller. Granted, it is not a decision that says "anyone can own any gun they want, no restrictions allowed," but it COULDN'T have been. IF the Supreme Court decides to take a case (and it only takes about 1% of those appealed to it), it only rules on the very narrow issues specified well by the Court when it grants Cert. There may be (and usually are) some comments in a decision that go beyond the issue(s) being decided, but these aren't law, only "dicta" or comments about the subject.

The Heller decision was quite specific that sport alone was not the only activity protected by the 2nd. In fact, not even serving in the militia (that is specifically mentioned in the 2nd Amendment) is the sole criteria. Self-defense is one that was specifically added (because it was at issue), and others were hinted at. It is my opinion tha the case at issue will (if appealed) be reversed at either the Circuit or Supreme Court level. Heller has been - as Miller was and continues to be - misconstrued and misinterpreted. A loss for our side at the level of some lower federal court is necessary to set things up for a Supreme Court appeal that will be granted Cert. I am quite certain that this Court will not uphold this type of decision. In fact, this particular case (again, if appealed) may even lead to a definitive opinion about the types of guns that are protected under the 2nd.

40 posted on 08/21/2008 11:06:24 AM PDT by Ancesthntr (An ex-citizen of the Frederation dedicated to stopping the Obomination from becoming President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

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