Posted on 06/26/2008 3:55:39 AM PDT by RKBA Democrat
DCvHeller is a HUGE win for freedom!
Every so-called Constitutional scholar who declared that the 2nd Amendment did not protect “individual rights” has been shown up as a misguided political hack.
This is a game-changing court-ruling in that an oft-repeated liberal lie about so-called “group rights” has been put to rest in favor of “individual rights.”
And that’s a win for freedom!
Thanks for your help, mware.
As for the "got you covered part", at 09:59 I was a lot less sure what that might necessarily involve.
Howdy DC,
If you read the opinion I can clearly see that one (open carry) or the other (concealed) must be allowed. The older court cases cited also allude to that fact.
Good news finally!
John McCain, Duncan Hunter, The Huckleberry, The Mormon, Fred Thompson, Rudy!...
Does somebody have a problem with counting?
NRA just announced on the steps of the Supreme Court steps that they are filing suit in Chicago.
No question who Obama would nominate. He’d nominate a total Marxist.
With McCain, we have a chance.
I live in Chicago. How would the challenge process start?
I alno noticed than laws on Gun locks, gun safes ect are null and void since they make it impossible for citizens to use them for the corelawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.
LOLOLOL - good one.
Yes, indeed. A huge win for freedom. With the way the country has been going lately I was afraid this decision would go differently.
I think by “we” he meant conservatives. Obviously Rudy doesn’t count. Nor McPain or Huck. I think he probably means Hunter, Thompson, and Romney, though I don’t think I’d count Romney if it were me.
What does this do to Pres. GWH Bush’s ban on the importation of foreign military weapons?
Anyone know what implications this has, if any, for states with duty-to-retreat laws?
Yes, you are right, that single line says it all and leaves open the possibility in the future(providing we get at least one more constructionist on the bench)that more laws will be struck down if brought before the courts.
Here is some more cover, especially if you are from Chicago. The NRA just announced that they are going to file suit in Chicago and some other cities too.
Bingo.
But try telling people that back then.
“We therefore read Miller to say
only that the Second Amendment does not protect those
weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens
for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns.”
This worries me. It overturns the notion that arms useful for military service are protected.
“Obama agrees with the decision?” -
yet would never nominate a justice who would vote for it.
Freepmail me when you need it.
The NRA is aready on it.
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.