2nd Amendment To Be Heard

This is a discussion on 2nd Amendment To Be Heard within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; D.C. vs Heller 07-290. Oral arguments will be heard March 18th. Only one scheduled for the day.Win,Lose, or Draw we will be heard!!!!!...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: 2nd Amendment To Be Heard

  1. #1
    Member Array auburn4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    upstate S.C.
    Posts
    114

    2nd Amendment To Be Heard

    D.C. vs Heller 07-290. Oral arguments will be heard March 18th. Only one scheduled for the day.Win,Lose, or Draw we will be heard!!!!!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array ExactlyMyPoint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    2,958
    I vote for win.
    Preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse or Rapture....whichever comes first.

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array sniper58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,631
    +1 on the win vote.........
    Tim
    BE PREPARED - Noah didn't build the Ark when it was raining!
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    ________
    NRA Life Member

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Auburn,

    Are you saying only one/singluar argument will be heard...or the argument toward DCvHeller will be the only/singular argument to be heard by SCoTUS that day?

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  6. #5
    Member Array auburn4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    upstate S.C.
    Posts
    114
    That will be the only oral argument heard that day.

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array Bob The Great's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Slidell, LA
    Posts
    1,688
    now that's a date for my calendar. I wonder if transcripts will be readily available.
    "A well-educated electorate, being necessary to the continuance of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed."
    Is this hard to understand? Then why does it get unintelligible to some people when 5 little words are changed?

  8. #7
    VIP Member
    Array goawayfarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Fork Union, Virginia
    Posts
    2,691
    I don't put a lot of hope into this decision. I think that DC & the other states will be allowed to continue to limit firearms however those governments see fit.

    Nothing will change...........
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.-Seneca

    "If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. If I have a gun, what do I have to be paranoid about?" -Clint Smith

    "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." -Jeff Cooper

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Agreed GAA.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  10. #9
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Can anyone tell me if this will even matter to us seeing that the president and his staff said the lower courts ruling was off because it applied to citizens of states and not territories of the US which is what Washington DC is.

    Is this a technicality??

    Or am I way off in this thought?

  11. #10
    VIP Member
    Array goawayfarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Fork Union, Virginia
    Posts
    2,691
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    Can anyone tell me if this will even matter to us seeing that the president and his staff said the lower courts ruling was off because it applied to citizens of states and not territories of the US which is what Washington DC is.

    Is this a technicality??

    Or am I way off in this thought?
    They could just be giving the court a way out.

    The other thing that comes to mind....is what would happen in territories, if SCOTUS decides that the 2A applies there also??????
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.-Seneca

    "If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. If I have a gun, what do I have to be paranoid about?" -Clint Smith

    "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." -Jeff Cooper

  12. #11
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    I just got my recent copy of American Rifleman in the mail today. Got to read about this and alot surrounding the main issues, and pros/cons for the argument, and what might happen and what the court sets out to find in the case. All in all--I think it would be a rather short ordeal and may set some of the records straight. Despite what the court finds, our battles will continue. Count on it.

  13. #12
    Distinguished Member Array lacrosse50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    SW Ohio
    Posts
    1,283
    I've marked it on the calendar!
    The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.
    -Herbert Spencer

    NRA Life Member

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Ram Rod View Post
    I just got my recent copy of American Rifleman in the mail today. Got to read about this and alot surrounding the main issues, and pros/cons for the argument, and what might happen and what the court sets out to find in the case. All in all--I think it would be a rather short ordeal and may set some of the records straight. Despite what the court finds, our battles will continue. Count on it.
    I just read the article last night myself. As they pointed out in the article, it is a limited ruling, only addressing the right to own a handgun in working order within your dwelling. One of the things they pointed out that could get really ridiculous, is that said handgun owner may still be unable to legally transport the weapon, to or from the home for example.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  15. #14
    Senior Member Array mech1369dlw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    610
    In 1968, I was 12 years old. Dad used to take me on Friday nights to a sporting goods store. The old guys would sit around, drinking a few brews and tell lies and tall tales about hunting and fishing and other subjects to each other. One night, I remember his exact words, my father turned to me and said, "Son, this new law they just passed, called the Gun Control Act of 1968, is going to be a real pain in the posterior to everyone that has anything to do with guns". We used to be able to buy guns thru Sears and many other places. Just place the order and it came to the house. No questions asked.

    Now look at what kind of a nut roll we have to go thru in order to buy a gun. Some states are easier than others, but there are still a lot more hoops we have to jump thru now. I sure hope that SCOTUS will rule on our side or it will be another nail in the coffin. Sure hope that one day, I don't have to report my guns as "lost in a boating accident".
    A person is justified in the use of deadly force, if such person reasonably believes deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to such person or a third person.

  16. #15
    Distinguished Member Array kazzaerexys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,838
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    Can anyone tell me if this will even matter to us seeing that the president and his staff said the lower courts ruling was off because it applied to citizens of states and not territories of the US which is what Washington DC is.
    Can you tell me where you saw this?

    My recollection of the lower court case is that DC argued that the 2A doesn't apply in the district, and that the dissenting judge on the panel mentioned this in her opinion, but the decision did not assert that the 2A only applies in States.

    Furthermore, SCOTUS published the question they intend to answer with this case; they intend to address whether citizens who are not part of a recognized State militia (essentially, not in the National Guard) have an individual right to bear arms. Nothing about citizens of States or otherwise, just those citizens who don't happen to be in the National Guard.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Has Anyone Heard of This?
    By DaveJay in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: October 12th, 2010, 02:17 PM
  2. WA Supreme Court: 2nd Amendment applies to the states via 14th Amendment due process
    By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: April 11th, 2010, 04:35 PM
  3. 1st Amendment vs. 2nd Amendment in private forums
    By ShawnMoncali in forum Forum News, Feedback, Problems & Comments
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: March 15th, 2010, 11:54 AM
  4. Ever heard of ACN?
    By Olsen in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 23rd, 2010, 07:51 AM
  5. "Applying 2nd Amendment restrictions to the 1st Amendment ;-)"
    By goawayfarm in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: June 16th, 2007, 09:19 AM