Chicago files brief in McDonald v City of Chicago

This is a discussion on Chicago files brief in McDonald v City of Chicago within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Chicago has now filed its brief with SCOTUS in McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago. Here's a link. ChicagoGunCase.com...

Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Chicago files brief in McDonald v City of Chicago

  1. #1
    Member Array ming's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    191

    Chicago files brief in McDonald v City of Chicago

    Chicago has now filed its brief with SCOTUS in McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago. Here's a link.

    ChicagoGunCase.com

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array Rob P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In the sticks
    Posts
    631
    Interesting reading. First, Chicago starts out by trying the "militia argument" saying that the 2d amendment only applies "to the militia" to which SCOTUS just said NOT! in Heller.

    Then, Chicago argues that other countries bans on firearms means that ordered liberty allows the bans. Neatly forgetting that other countries aren't THIS country and that those other countries don't have constitutional amendments.

    Next, Chicago argues that a total ban on firearms doesn't somehow come afoul of the 2d amendment because a ban on firearms doesn't mean a complete ban on a "tool" usable for self defense. Thusly omitting the fact that swords, knives, dirks, daggers, pipes, canes, etc are ALL banned too.

    Chicago also argues that the Privileges or Immunities clause doesn't apply to citizens of States because they are STATE citizens and not US citizens. Once again omitting the fact that ALL citizens of any State in the Union are also US citizens. If not, then the freedmen wouldn't have any protections at all under the 14th.

    At that point I realized that Chicago is just restating DC's position in Heller because there isn't anything more to say than what was already said in Heller by both/all sides. There isn't any legal precedent that hasn't been looked at and analyzed for it's use either pro or con by any party and already used or discarded in Heller.

    The real issue isn't guns. The real issue is whether the 14th amendment protects the citizens from overreaching by the individual States through removing protections that pre-exist the forming of this country.

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array tiwee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    1,708
    I hope for our brothers in Illinois that the lame response from Chicago gets the heave ho from the Supremes.

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,639
    Quote Originally Posted by tiwee View Post
    I hope for our brothers in Illinois that the lame response from Chicago gets the heave ho from the Supremes.
    AMEN !!!

  6. #5
    VIP Member
    Array shooterX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,849
    Quote Originally Posted by tiwee View Post
    I hope for our brothers in Illinois that the lame response from Chicago gets the heave ho from the Supremes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Eagleks View Post
    AMEN !!!
    +1 As it should be

  7. #6
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,529
    Soon... (Chicago is receiving)...very soon!
    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]

  8. #7
    Member Array UnklFungus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    441
    As is stated in my sig line for some time:
    Quote Originally Posted by retsupt99 View Post
    I am hoping that the SCOTUS sends a message back to Chicago that involves a jar of vasoline...
    Pretty much says it all!!
    “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”

    Patrick Henry
    Quote Originally Posted by UnklFungus
    If it is ok to disarm legal citizens to reduce crime, then doesn't it stand to disband the military to prevent war?

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    The real issue isn't guns. The real issue is whether the 14th amendment protects the citizens from overreaching by the individual States through removing protections that pre-exist the forming of this country.
    Yes. If only the nine robes will see the simplicity of it, ignoring their long-held biases.

    The people in the several states founded the nation on the basis of a handful of core, foundation principles, including the right to be armed as individuals see fit. The CORE principles apply to all citizens, always, everywhere. But state evasion has rendered many of them impotent and irrelevant.

    Wouldn't it be something, if the 1A applied to everyone, if the 2A applied to everyone, and so on. What a concept.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,047
    Very interesting reading. Am still getting through several of the documents. Thank you for the links, all.

    Hm. Slaughterhouse. The 14A incorporation idea. Privileges & Immunities. The simple fact of the right of people to defend themselves being thwarted by fearful, controlling bureaucrats. If the supremes find it within themselves to avoid the strong political biases this time around, they might read this one correctly. We'll see.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  11. #10
    Member Array Sub Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Cary, IL
    Posts
    95
    I hope so. Maybe this will be the final straw for Mayor Daley and our corrupt politians that have no back bone!!!
    U.S. Navy Veteran-NRA Member
    Taurus PT 845, PT 99 AF
    Ruger SR9
    1938 Mauser K98 8mm, 1917 DWM German Luger
    1952 M1 Garand
    Guns have only two enemies; rust and politicians.

  12. #11
    VIP Member
    Array falcon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,482
    An article I found interesting:

    Laboratories of Repression
    We don’t let the states “experiment” on the First Amendment. Should the Second Amendment receive any less respect?

    Damon W. Root | December 31, 2009

    In 1932, progressive Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis penned one of the most famous passages in American jurisprudence. “It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system,” Brandeis wrote in his dissent in New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, “that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory, and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.”

    Since then, Brandeis’ famous words have been quoted or referenced countless times, appearing everywhere from legal documents to campaign speeches. Most recently, they surfaced in the arguments leading up to the landmark Second Amendment case McDonald v. Chicago, which the Supreme Court is set to hear in early March 2010.

    At issue in the case is Chicago’s draconian handgun ban, a restriction that largely mirrors the gun control law struck down last year by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller. The key difference is that Heller only decided whether the Second Amendment secures an individual right against infringement by the federal government (which oversees Washington, D.C.). McDonald will settle whether the amendment’s right to keep and bear arms applies against state and local governments as well.
    See the remainder of the article here:
    Laboratories of Repression - Reason Magazine
    If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.--Samuel Adams as Candidus, Boston Gazette 20 Jan. 1772

    Veteran--USA FA
    NRA Benefactor Life
    Tennessee Firearms Association Life

  13. #12
    Member Array Templar71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    USSA
    Posts
    24
    Wonder how BHO will meddle in this one? Either above the table or below. I suspect "Dick" D won't be able to stay out of this one either.
    Templar

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. McDonald vs Chicago
    By joecs1 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 25th, 2010, 05:56 PM
  2. McDonald et al v City of Chicago [merged]
    By ming in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: February 28th, 2010, 10:18 AM
  3. Gura's reply brief in McDonald v City of Chicago filed
    By ming in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 29th, 2010, 04:33 PM
  4. McDonald et. al. v City of Chicago
    By ming in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: January 27th, 2010, 01:09 PM
  5. ? on McDonald v. City of Chicago
    By ming in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: January 12th, 2010, 01:46 PM

Search tags for this page

explain the articles positions and arguments on right to bear to bear arms in mcdonald v. chicago

,

explain the articles' positions and arguments in mcdonald vs. chicago

,

explain the article?s position and argument on mcdonald v. chicago

,

liebmann vs mcdonalds

,

mcdonald v chicago brief

Click on a term to search for related topics.