Heller aftermath: Wilmette Suspends Local Handgun Ban‏

mrreynolds · June 27th, 2008, 07:56 PM

Wilmette has suspended enforcement of its 19-year-old ordinance banning handgun possession in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that appears to invalidate such bans.

In a 5-4 decision, the court struck down Washington, D.C.'s ban on handguns, a prohibition similar to those used in several major cities, including Chicago, and a handful of suburbs including Wilmette, Evanston, Winnetka and Oak Park.

"The Law Department and the Police Department have suspended enforcement of the ordinance pending further review by the Village Board," Wilmette village attorney Tim Frenzer said Thursday. "Based on the decision today, at a minimum it calls into serious question the continued viability of the ordinance."

Frenzer said questions remain about how directly the court's decision will impact local gun laws in Wilmette and other parts of the country. Washington is not a state, and each state has its own legal language governing the right to bear arms.

"That aside, the opinion will require further review and discussion by the Village Board, but it's prudent at this point to suspend enforcement of it," Frenzer said.

Wilmette's law, enacted in 1989, levied fines of up to $750 for handgun possession and allowed the village to seek a judge's order to have seized weapons destroyed.

Frenzer said he did not know exactly how many times the law has been invoked, but said its use is rare.

The last case he recalls involved a 2003 incident in which a resident, Hale DeMar, was cited after using a handgun to shoot and wound a burglar in his home. The case mobilized state gun right groups and led to the passage of a law that gave gun owners a defense to local prohibitions if the weapon was used in self-defense.

Wilmette's charges against DeMar were eventually dropped. He could not be reached for comment Thursday.

Wilmette Police Chief George Carpenter declined to comment on the high court's ruling, saying he had not yet had a chance to read the decision or review it with village staff.

NBC5's Phil Rogers reported that Wilmette was not the only community with big decisions to make in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision. Six Chicago area communities: Wilmette, Winnetka, Evanston, Chicago, Oak Park and Morton Grove, have outright handgun bans, dating back to 1981, which are now apparently illegal.

Eight other communities: Highland Park, Deerfield, Northbrook, River Grove, Westmont, Forest Park, Elk Grove Village and Niles, ban the sale or transfer of handguns within their city limits.

On Friday, the Chicago Tribune called for the repeal of the Second Amendment. But barring that, Rogers reported, the Supreme Court's decision seems to leave little wiggle room for refinement of existing laws.

"It's going to be very challenging, I think, for municipalities to hold on to the overall ban on a handgun," Frenzer said.

As local communities tried to determine exactly how the ruling affected them, many activists made it clear that they were not prepared to take "no" for an answer.

Civil rights activist Rev. Jesse Jackson declared that if the law means more gun stores, he would fight to have a say as to where they are located. Jackson also likened the fight against gun violence to the struggle for civil rights.

"We have legalized access to weapons of mass destruction," Jackson said. "We have become the most violent nation on earth. We make the most guns and we shoot them."

ARTICLE

HotGuns · June 27th, 2008, 08:53 PM

Quote:

"We have legalized access to weapons of mass destruction," Jackson said. "We have become the most violent nation on earth. We make the most guns and we shoot them."

Why people continue to care about what that jerk says or thinks amazes me.

Weapons of masss destruction huh? That just goes to show that he is more ignorant of firearms than I thought he was.

SixBravo · June 27th, 2008, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Six Chicago area communities: Wilmette, Winnetka, Evanston, Chicago, Oak Park and Morton Grove, have outright handgun bans, dating back to 1981, which are now apparently illegal.

Pity Party of Chicago, your table is now available.

Yeah HG, Jacksons a moron. If he wants a say as to where the shops are located then I should be able to tell people where they can put their churches. And Newspaper stands. And where they can exercise their 4th and 5th Amendment rights. That guy wouldn't get a clue if it smacked him in the face.

falcon1 · June 27th, 2008, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HotGuns

Why people continue to care about what that jerk says or thinks amazes me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SixBravo

Yeah HG, Jacksons a moron. If he wants a say as to where the shops are located then I should be able to tell people where they can put their churches. And Newspaper stands. And where they can exercise their 4th and 5th Amendment rights. That guy wouldn't get a clue if it smacked him in the face.

And, if you remember, he never ran for any office that he could actually have won. If he had and did, he would have had to produce actual results, instead of grand-stand.

NKMG19 · June 27th, 2008, 09:44 PM

Quote:

"We have legalized access to weapons of mass destruction," Jackson said. "We have become the most violent nation on earth. We make the most guns and we shoot them."

This guy is a jackass. He does not speak for anyone that I know. Who ever made him spokesman for an entire community.

SIGguy229 · June 27th, 2008, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Civil rights activist Rev. Jesse Jackson declared that if the law means more gun stores, he would fight to have a say as to where they are located. Jackson also likened the fight against gun violence to the struggle for civil rights.

Ummm.....so I guess those shotguns and rifles pastors and preachers used to defend their families, friends, and churches from the KKK should have never existed? I guess guns were never used in the fight for civil rights....nor is the 2A considered a civil right.

Moron.

Eagleks · June 27th, 2008, 11:53 PM

And they talk about Bush/Cheney using scare tactics about Iraq, compared to these guys.... Bush / Cheney were amateurs.

paramedic70002 · June 28th, 2008, 12:01 AM

High Court gun ban veto triggers review of Mass. law - BostonHerald.com

High Court gun ban veto triggers review of Mass. law

Yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling striking down the District of Columbia’s 32-year-old ban on handguns will force Massachusetts officials to review the state’s gun laws, long considered among the toughest in the nation.

In the justices’ first major pronouncement on gun rights, the court ruled 5-4 that Washington’s ban was incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment.

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said her office was reviewing the decision but did not expect it to result in a “radical” change in the state’s gun laws.

“This decision is part of an on-going process . . . to balance public safety concerns and the need for sensible gun control with the legitimate right of law-abiding citizens to own firearms for hunting, sport or self-defense,” Coakley said. “Our office will work with state and local law enforcement to ensure that we strike that balance.‘

Massachusetts has 216,000 registered firearms, according to the Executive Office of Public Safety. But in Boston, where there are 4,300 active gun licenses, police Commissioner Ed Davis said he was concerned about the ruling.

“I feel that it opens the door for fewer regulations, which has the potential of resulting in increased deaths,” Davis said.

The court not only struck down Washington’s handgun ban, but also a requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled. Massachusetts has a similar law requiring that guns either have a trigger lock or be secured in a locked container.

“We’ve been arguing since 1998, when the Legislature passed the mandatory storage law, that it would be impossible to defend yourself in your home when you’re required to keep your firearm under lock and key,” said James Wallace, executive director of the Gun Owners Action League.

In his majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia agreed, noting that the handgun is Americans’ preferred weapon of self-defense in part because “it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police.”

Boston College law professor Robert Bloom said the Supreme Court ruling may cause Massachusetts to revise its gun laws.

“I could envision a child-safety lock being appropriate, much like a child-safe pill bottle,” Bloom said. “But I wonder whether requiring a gun to be locked up will still be valid because Scalia said for a gun to truly be used in self-defense, you need instantaneous access.”

But John Rosenthal, a gun owner and founder and chairman of Stop Handgun Violence, said he expects the ruling to have little practical effect.

“Responsible gun owners lock their guns,” he said. “Irresponsible gun owners don’t.”
Article URL: High Court gun ban veto triggers review of Mass. law - BostonHerald.com

SixBravo · June 28th, 2008, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paramedic70002

“Responsible gun owners lock their guns,” he said. “Irresponsible gun owners don’t.”

Just because he's too irresponsible to teach his own children about firearms safety doesn't mean that the rest of the country doesn't. Does it suck when a kid shoots himself accidentally? Sure does. Is the gun to blame? Its like blaming the car for the drunk driver.

Funny how it all comes back to what he's talking about: irresponsibility.

64zebra · June 28th, 2008, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eagleks

And they talk about Bush/Cheney using scare tactics about Iraq, compared to these guys.... Bush / Cheney were amateurs.

AMEN!!!!

If Jesse Jackson wasn't a moron, and knew his history, he'd know that when blacks could not own firearms (but whites were able to), there was a disparity of force = they were more vulnerable to crime......he ought to be applauding the fact that the good guys (citizens of all colors of skin, ethnic origin, etc) in DC, Chicago, etc, have the right to own firearms for protection from criminals,
I guess thats asking too much

June 27th, 2008, 07:56 PM	#1
mrreynolds Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Harlem, NY Posts: 348	Heller aftermath: Wilmette Suspends Local Handgun Ban‏ Wilmette has suspended enforcement of its 19-year-old ordinance banning handgun possession in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that appears to invalidate such bans. In a 5-4 decision, the court struck down Washington, D.C.'s ban on handguns, a prohibition similar to those used in several major cities, including Chicago, and a handful of suburbs including Wilmette, Evanston, Winnetka and Oak Park. "The Law Department and the Police Department have suspended enforcement of the ordinance pending further review by the Village Board," Wilmette village attorney Tim Frenzer said Thursday. "Based on the decision today, at a minimum it calls into serious question the continued viability of the ordinance." Frenzer said questions remain about how directly the court's decision will impact local gun laws in Wilmette and other parts of the country. Washington is not a state, and each state has its own legal language governing the right to bear arms. "That aside, the opinion will require further review and discussion by the Village Board, but it's prudent at this point to suspend enforcement of it," Frenzer said. Wilmette's law, enacted in 1989, levied fines of up to $750 for handgun possession and allowed the village to seek a judge's order to have seized weapons destroyed. Frenzer said he did not know exactly how many times the law has been invoked, but said its use is rare. The last case he recalls involved a 2003 incident in which a resident, Hale DeMar, was cited after using a handgun to shoot and wound a burglar in his home. The case mobilized state gun right groups and led to the passage of a law that gave gun owners a defense to local prohibitions if the weapon was used in self-defense. Wilmette's charges against DeMar were eventually dropped. He could not be reached for comment Thursday. Wilmette Police Chief George Carpenter declined to comment on the high court's ruling, saying he had not yet had a chance to read the decision or review it with village staff. NBC5's Phil Rogers reported that Wilmette was not the only community with big decisions to make in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision. Six Chicago area communities: Wilmette, Winnetka, Evanston, Chicago, Oak Park and Morton Grove, have outright handgun bans, dating back to 1981, which are now apparently illegal. Eight other communities: Highland Park, Deerfield, Northbrook, River Grove, Westmont, Forest Park, Elk Grove Village and Niles, ban the sale or transfer of handguns within their city limits. On Friday, the Chicago Tribune called for the repeal of the Second Amendment. But barring that, Rogers reported, the Supreme Court's decision seems to leave little wiggle room for refinement of existing laws. "It's going to be very challenging, I think, for municipalities to hold on to the overall ban on a handgun," Frenzer said. As local communities tried to determine exactly how the ruling affected them, many activists made it clear that they were not prepared to take "no" for an answer. Civil rights activist Rev. Jesse Jackson declared that if the law means more gun stores, he would fight to have a say as to where they are located. Jackson also likened the fight against gun violence to the struggle for civil rights. "We have legalized access to weapons of mass destruction," Jackson said. "We have become the most violent nation on earth. We make the most guns and we shoot them." ARTICLE __________________ www.SmallArmz.info - Harlem, NYC I Can't Carry Here But I'm A Member Of The NRA. Are You? Impact Guns / U.S. Concealed Carry SAF,GOA,NYSPRA,NRA Life,Pro-Gun NH

June 28th, 2008, 12:01 AM	#8
paramedic70002 Distinguished Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Franklin, VA Posts: 1,782	High Court gun ban veto triggers review of Mass. law - BostonHerald.com High Court gun ban veto triggers review of Mass. law Yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling striking down the District of Columbia’s 32-year-old ban on handguns will force Massachusetts officials to review the state’s gun laws, long considered among the toughest in the nation. In the justices’ first major pronouncement on gun rights, the court ruled 5-4 that Washington’s ban was incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said her office was reviewing the decision but did not expect it to result in a “radical” change in the state’s gun laws. “This decision is part of an on-going process . . . to balance public safety concerns and the need for sensible gun control with the legitimate right of law-abiding citizens to own firearms for hunting, sport or self-defense,” Coakley said. “Our office will work with state and local law enforcement to ensure that we strike that balance.‘ Massachusetts has 216,000 registered firearms, according to the Executive Office of Public Safety. But in Boston, where there are 4,300 active gun licenses, police Commissioner Ed Davis said he was concerned about the ruling. “I feel that it opens the door for fewer regulations, which has the potential of resulting in increased deaths,” Davis said. The court not only struck down Washington’s handgun ban, but also a requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled. Massachusetts has a similar law requiring that guns either have a trigger lock or be secured in a locked container. “We’ve been arguing since 1998, when the Legislature passed the mandatory storage law, that it would be impossible to defend yourself in your home when you’re required to keep your firearm under lock and key,” said James Wallace, executive director of the Gun Owners Action League. In his majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia agreed, noting that the handgun is Americans’ preferred weapon of self-defense in part because “it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police.” Boston College law professor Robert Bloom said the Supreme Court ruling may cause Massachusetts to revise its gun laws. “I could envision a child-safety lock being appropriate, much like a child-safe pill bottle,” Bloom said. “But I wonder whether requiring a gun to be locked up will still be valid because Scalia said for a gun to truly be used in self-defense, you need instantaneous access.” But John Rosenthal, a gun owner and founder and chairman of Stop Handgun Violence, said he expects the ruling to have little practical effect. “Responsible gun owners lock their guns,” he said. “Irresponsible gun owners don’t.” Article URL: High Court gun ban veto triggers review of Mass. law - BostonHerald.com __________________ Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But... Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

June 27th, 2008, 11:53 PM	#7
Eagleks Senior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Kansas Posts: 615	And they talk about Bush/Cheney using scare tactics about Iraq, compared to these guys.... Bush / Cheney were amateurs.