When the Supreme Court rules in our favor....what's our next step?

This is a discussion on When the Supreme Court rules in our favor....what's our next step? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; When the Supreme Court rules in our favor....what's our next step? World Peace $.50 a gallon gas $.10 a gallon milk End of PORK BARREL ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 25 of 25

Thread: When the Supreme Court rules in our favor....what's our next step?

  1. #16
    Member Array inman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Amarillo, Texas
    Posts
    113
    When the Supreme Court rules in our favor....what's our next step?


    World Peace

    $.50 a gallon gas

    $.10 a gallon milk

    End of PORK BARREL SPENDING

    Representatives that actually REPRESENT

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member Array Kerbouchard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,894
    The problem with answering your question, is that while they will most likely rule in our favor, there are so many degrees of favorableness they can rule in...It would be great if they made a broad, landmark decision, but it's going to be so tailored that it won't do much. The most we can hope for is a strict level of scrutiny, in which case we would have to take our local ordinances to the courts to determine their constitutionality. And I think that's too much to hope for anyway.

    My guess on the ruling, Individual right, intermediate level of scrutiny, D.C. is not a state so a federal law is unconstitutional...that's my .02
    There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

    http://miscmusings.townhall.com/

    Who is John Galt?

  4. #18
    VIP Member Array rodc13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    2,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Ram Rod View Post
    That's what I was thinking, but didn't want to say it. It's still going to take a lot more than we may suspect. Pray the Good Lord sends divine guidance upon the Supreme Court as He did unto the hands of the men that wrote the constitution in the first place. I hope to not offend anyone with my religious intonations, but everyone needs to realize that God and this nation go hand-in-hand. Pray.
    As I hope that the justices will exercise their human powers of reason to arrive at a rational decision, as did our founding fathers. If so, there'll definitely be a result in our favor, as it's eminently logical.
    Cheers,
    Rod
    "We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters

  5. #19
    Senior Member Array hudsonvalley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    lower hudson valley ny
    Posts
    849
    Quote Originally Posted by inman View Post
    When the Supreme Court rules in our favor....what's our next step?


    World Peace

    $.50 a gallon gas

    $.10 a gallon milk

    End of PORK BARREL SPENDING

    Representatives that actually REPRESENT
    Good one!
    But to be honest with you....I wasn't trying to get so deep......
    NEW THREAD COMING>>>>!!!!
    Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
    ---Ronald Reagan

  6. #20
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108
    I say that after we get a favorable ruling, we begin a full court press against cities like New York, Chicago, DC, etc. and force them to enact shall issue carry legislation.

    then, we can begin to lobby for national reciprocity on all CCW licenses, and carry on domestic plane flights. To me, this is more realistic than trying to legalize full auto weapons for now...

    First, we take small steps
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

  7. #21
    Senior Member Array Pitmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wherever there's fried chicken or barbecue
    Posts
    642
    Its not what gun owners want. The next step will be what the NRA wants. The NRA does have a vested interest in maintaining some elements of gun control so they can continue to make money. I doubt if they want to go back to the education and training programs of yesteryear.

    Cancer doctors don't want a cure for cancer. They just want better medicines to use so they can continue to treat people with cancer.

    Mechanics don't want cars that break down either.
    Pitmaster

    HELGA: Where are you going?
    HAGAR: To sign a peace treaty with the King of England.
    HELGA: Then why take all those weapons?
    HAGAR: First we gotta negotiate...

  8. #22
    Member Array rscalzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Epping, NH
    Posts
    59
    carry on domestic plane flights
    Airlines will never allow it. As far as the discussion so far, most has been concerned with ownership and possession in your home. I don't expect a lot of change for years to come.
    Richard Scalzo, Capt.
    Secaucus PD
    Secaucus, NJ
    Retired !!!!

  9. #23
    Senior Member Array Pitmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wherever there's fried chicken or barbecue
    Posts
    642
    Quote Originally Posted by rscalzo View Post
    Airlines will never allow it. As far as the discussion so far, most has been concerned with ownership and possession in your home. I don't expect a lot of change for years to come.
    Agreed. I'm not necessarily opposed to not carrying on airlines. Given the choice between carrying or baggage security improvement. I'll go for baggage. I'm not a fan of a gun fight on an airplane. Pilots yes, passengers no.

    Besides the seats are too small to have a on on your side.
    Pitmaster

    HELGA: Where are you going?
    HAGAR: To sign a peace treaty with the King of England.
    HELGA: Then why take all those weapons?
    HAGAR: First we gotta negotiate...

  10. #24
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by DPro.40 View Post
    I really don't think reasonable can be define at this point until a complete ruling is made. I think anything that restricts the sale of ammo and firearms that reduce or restrict the right of law abiding citizens to protect Home, family and health is unreasonable. This includes CCW.Are you now picking and choosing who the second amendment right should be extended to?

    Self Defense, why so defensive? If the ruling is in our favor it is only to insured the rights afforded by the 2nd admendment to the people, by the people and put an end to the gun ban of areas like DC and continued ares in Illinois and California. I'm sure there is more places and will be future attempts to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens. There will probably be more legal rangling in the future if we do or do not get a favorable ruling. Current laws now are suppose to protect society from those who do not demonstrate the ability to live in a structured society. Do you now think that a favorable ruling will wipe the slate clean and everyone will be humping an M60 because everyone will have the right to do what they want. I get the feeling you are looking for responses here and you already understand your question about prisoners being armed is simply thought provoking. I've added my two cents and see no further need to address unreasonable.Are you now picking and choosing who the second amendment right should be extended to?
    I'm not being defensive, only offering examples of where reasonable restrictions apply to any right. With rights come responsibilities. Everyone who addressed my questions proposed restrictions that are reasonable to themselves.

    The eight year old with supervision or the incarcerated prisoner. In our zeal to advocate our position we sometimes become a bit hard headed in our positions. My point is that there are obviously reasonable restrictions necessary and as a society we should make those restricions so they do not unduly restrict our freedoms.

    The best way to further our cause is to acknowledge that some restrictions are good for society and others put an undue burden on our rights. I, for one, do not want an eight year old, mentally retarded, incarcerated prisoner to have a right to have a nuclear weapon in his cell. Some don't want guns in the hands of law abiding citizens because they wrongly think that violence will be reduced.

    We should argue the case with facts (as we often do among ourselves here) to the people, convince our neighbors, elect people who agree with the proposition that guns in the hands of law abiding citizens not only is a natural right but is a deterrent to threats and most importantly pass legislation that minimizes the restrictions that are unreasonable to the people.

  11. #25
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Quote Originally Posted by Self Defense View Post
    I, for one, do not want an eight year old, mentally retarded, incarcerated prisoner to have a right to have a nuclear weapon in his cell.

    We should argue the case with facts (as we often do among ourselves here) to the people, convince our neighbors, elect people who agree with the proposition that guns in the hands of law abiding citizens not only is a natural right but is a deterrent to threats and most importantly pass legislation that minimizes the restrictions that are unreasonable to the people.

    Nuclear weapons ??? How did you ever there? I refer you to your second paragraph. I believe we all wish to protect our rights as a free society. All I'm attempting to drive home is we should not embrace our view point with a "The sky is Falling" zeal and run a muck with ideas of who is is entitled and who is not. There will plenty who will attempt to do that for us. There will be a great deal of legal challenges. New York, Illinois, California come to mind. In a true free society, we should not have to ask anyone if the right to self preservation is socially acceptable. We need the ruling, facts and level headed approach to what is reasonable. There will be those who will attempt to find a definition to reasonable that still looks like gun control to us. The NRA is not out of business. Just home court advantage if a favorable ruling is applied to common sense. I was not going to answer but could not help myself. Thats for the lively debate Self Defense.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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. San Diego Court Rules Against Concealed Carry - NRA to Appeal to 9th Circuit Court
    By LanceORYGUN in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: January 6th, 2011, 11:44 PM
  2. Supreme Court and 2A
    By JoJoGunn in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: March 3rd, 2010, 01:13 AM
  3. One for the good guys! Cities can't ban guns from parks, Ohio Supreme Court rules
    By Divebum47 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: September 19th, 2008, 12:59 PM
  4. US Supreme Court Over Rules Bush and The World Court (Merged)
    By Sig 210 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: March 28th, 2008, 08:56 PM

Search tags for this page

when supreme court rules in your favor, what is the next step

Click on a term to search for related topics.