June 27th, 2010 02:16 AM
So, what do you think SCOTUS will say? This is McDonald V Chicago. I am anxious, about it, but at the same time, I have good feelings toward it, esp. in light of the record number of Amicus Briefs filed by members of both the House and Senate.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”
Originally Posted by UnklFungus
June 27th, 2010 02:50 AM
I think it will go in favor of Mcdonald. I know that if they do rule in favor of Mcdonald it will be a huge victory for the gun community but I think some people are overestimating the affect it will actually have.
Someone please correct if I am wrong; but the way I interpret the argument, if we win then states will have to recognize the right to keep and bear arms. However it still won't prevent them from basically having bans by having all sorts of fees, registrations, licensing, training, testing, and may issue laws. So now people in places like Chicago will technically have the right to have guns and handguns etc... but it will be nearly impossible for them to get them. I think there is still a long uphill battle to be fought. Like I said someone please correct me if I am looking at this wrong, as I really hope I am.
June 27th, 2010 03:24 AM
Yeah....but I guess (??) these types of requirements may (?) be grounds for civil rights cases? Similar to past cases prohibiting reading tests before one votes and the like.
- know the difference
is a fancy name for crappy fighter
You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know
June 27th, 2010 04:18 AM
Thats kind of what I was thinking, except I had never heard of reading tests to vote, did we really have that? Anyway, I guess the point is that this ruling will be a start but we can't get shortsighted because you know people like the brady bunch aren't. There are always going to be more debates and more lawsuits.
Originally Posted by SIGguy229
Like I said in my original post I may be confused, but some people have treated this case like its going to be the end all of "gun control vs gun rights" debate. It will be a huge step in the right direction but we still have a long ways to go.
Ok rant over.
P.S. Has anyone heard any kind of timeframe at all? Or are we all just going to be glued to our computers today? lol
June 27th, 2010 06:01 AM
SCOTUSBLOG thinks Alito will be writing the majority opinion, ruling in favor of McDonald and incorporating the second amendment. They speculate, though, that given Alito's "sensitivity towards law enforcement", that the ruling won't be written as a sweeping nullification of firearms regulation.
Battle Plan (n) - a list of things that aren't going to happen if you are attacked.
Blame it on Sixto - now that is a viable plan.
June 27th, 2010 07:11 AM
Daley says he will continue gun control efforts if SCOTUS overturns the Chicago ban:
Clout St: Daley: City ready to act if Supreme Court overturns gun ban
Sounds like if SCOTUS rules as expected, Daley is going to try the same tactics that DC used to limit gun ownership as much as possible within the confines of the law.
Daley: City ready to act if Supreme Court overturns gun ban
Posted by Hal Dardick and John Byrne at 10:05 a.m.; last updated at 1:55 p.m.
Mayor Richard Daley today rejected the idea that the Supreme Court is likely to overturn the city's gun ban, but said that he will be ready to act quickly to put in place restrictions on gun ownership if it does.
It's defeatist to prepare new gun laws ahead of the court's ruling, which should come before the body recesses at the end of June, Daley said.
"You have to have confidence in the Supreme Court, Maybe they'll see the light of day," Daley said at a City Hall news conference. "Maybe one of them will have an incident and they'll change their mind overnight, going to and from work."
The mayor said if the court overturns the Chicago ban, as expected, he'll quickly present new legislation to the City Council.
"Whatever the details of the court's ruling will be, we will always find new ways to keep guns off our streets," he said.
Daley offered no specifics on what he will propose. But he talked about the possibility of ballistics tests for registered guns, so police can track them if they're used in crimes.
He also said that if guns are allowed in Chicago, something has to be done to allow police, firefighters and other first responders know how many weapons are in a home as they respond to a call.
"If you get a call for domestic violence, or you get a call for a burglary, or you get a call that a man with a gun is outside someone's home, and the police officer goes to the scene, goes to the door and sees a person with a gun, what decision does he have to make with regards to his safety and the safety in that home?" Daley said.
"When you think about that, you're really placing the first responders in a much more difficult -- with all the restrictions on police officers, what they can do and what they can't do -- we'll have to give them a worksheet for them, where they'll have to read it to you, take your FOI card out?"
During the news conference, Daley reacted with the help of a prop when a reporter suggested the city's handgun ban has been ineffective, given the number of shootings that still occur in Chicago.
"It's been very effective," Daley said, picking up a gun from the dozens displayed on a nearby table. "If I put this up your butt, you'll find out how effective it is. Let me put a round up your, you know."
"But that's why you want to get them out," he continued. "You want to get these out. This gun saved many lives. It could save your life."
The mayor mentioned the possibility of some kind of registry to let police know how many guns and what types are in each house, but said nothing has been finalized.
In 1982, the city barred the registration of additional handguns, but allowed those residents who already had handguns to keep them. That ordinance became known as the city’s handgun ban.
In June 2008, the nation's high court overturned a similar ban in Washington, D.C.. and justices are now weighing a Chicago case that will determine whether that ruling should be extended beyond federal enclaves.
Supreme Court justices are expected to rule next month on McDonald vs. City of Chicago. The court heard arguments March 2 on the case. At the time, Tribune Supreme Court reporter David G. Savage reported that most of the justices who two years ago said the 2nd Amendment protects individual gun rights signaled they are ready to extend this right nationwide and to use it to strike down some state and local gun regulations. You can read the rest of that story by clicking here.
In the D.C. case, justices did not close the door on all gun regulation, and D.C. later enacted a law requiring gun owners to go through five hours of safety training, register their firearms every three years and undergo criminal background checks every six years.
More extensive training requirements for gun owners -- such as that enacted in Washington D.C. -- also is a possibility, Daley said.
"We'll work harder to make sure only responsible adults can have access to guns across the nation," Daley said. "When you think about that, you have to go through driver's ed and you have to get a license, you have to pass a test for drivers, but you don't have to really do anything to own a gun," he said.
Preserving the handgun ban has been high on Daley's agenda during his two decades as mayor. For years, Daley also has pressed state lawmakers for tighter gun control laws, including an assault weapons ban, but has found only limited success in a state where gun owner rights are closely guarded downstate.
Daley stating that the Chicago handgun ban has been very effective is ludicrous considering the number of people that were shot/killed in a recent weekend.
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground."
- Thomas Jefferson
"I'm the arrow, you're my bow, shoot me forth and I will go"
"Do not let any individual posts put a knot in your Big Boy Under-Roos"
June 27th, 2010 09:07 AM
Chicago doesn't have to worry about keeping guns off the streets, just keeping the criminals off the streets would do the trick.
Oh, wait a minute, then who would run the mayor's office?
The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member[/B]
June 27th, 2010 09:10 AM
Glock 26 XD9sc
Ruger SR9c Ruger LCP
June 27th, 2010 07:47 PM
Look.... they are dumb enough to keep re-electing Daley, so they got what they voted for. Oh, excuse me..... correction .... what the unions paid for.
June 27th, 2010 10:11 PM
I think the 2A will be incorporated to the states, but as in the Keller decision it will leave room for "reasonable" regulation. That opening will be used to tie up people with fees/paperwork/restrictions and then argued in the courts for years.
A better decision would be to spell out what is "reasonable" in the decision, including limiting fees and delays. I don't expect them to get that detailed.
An enemy of liberty is no friend of mine. I do not owe respect to anyone who would enslave me by government force, nor is it wise for such a person to expect it. -- Isaiah Amberay
June 28th, 2010 06:19 AM
I hope your not lumping all Unions in the same pot.
Originally Posted by Eagleks
HTC Thunderbolt....4G Lightning Speed
June 28th, 2010 11:55 PM
American gun owner 2 Chicago 0.... BWAHAHAHAHA
"The sword dose not cause the murder, and the maker of the sword dose not bear sin" Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac 11th century
By Phoebe in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: September 20th, 2009, 10:07 PM
By jamierah in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: March 15th, 2009, 08:18 PM
By TN_Mike in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: August 20th, 2007, 05:02 PM
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors