Uncle Bill Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court says Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history. The court's 5-4 ruling strikes down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision goes further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact. The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for four colleagues, said the Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home." In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons." He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found." THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court says Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history. The court's 5-4 ruling strikes down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision goes further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact. The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia. source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dharmabum Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 This ruling was not 'in favor of the Second Amendment" as the amendment itself was never threatened. Rather, the ruling was in favor of a particular interpretation of the amendment. Or so it seems to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Zeppnile Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Well, finally a decision goes our way. That is to say the way for real Americans and not those pantywaist socialist liberal dodo birds. But why the Supreme court took 40 years to affirm a right so clearly enumerated in the Bill Of Rights is a mystery to me. Obviously the Washington D.C. law prohibiting citizens from owning a handgun in their homes was draconian. So why do these damn courts take forever to figure that shit out? Now let's start taking other stuff back and clean this county up once and for all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledbaby Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Didnt see this thread....it's about time. I posted it in The Gun Thread too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRB Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 I still stay uneasy with the fact that in reactions I've read, not enough people are mentioning the right to keep and bear arms. The keeping is as important as the bearing. The amendment has constantly been threatened by wrong, ill-intentioned interpretations and legislation; this nation has for too long had its throat laid bare to the heel of the jackboot. Therefore, it is proper to say that this ruling was in favor of the amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledbaby Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 I still stay uneasy with the fact that in reactions I've read, not enough people are mentioning the right to keep and bear arms. The keeping is as important as the bearing. The amendment has constantly been threatened by wrong, ill-intentioned interpretations and legislation; this nation has for too long had its throat laid bare to the heel of the jackboot. Therefore, it is proper to say that this ruling was in favor of the amendment. They WILL NOT strip me of my guns. We should see what Ted Nugent has to say about it. I know a few people here who think like I do on this issue, this is no bull shit issue. If your nuts, or a criminal fine, illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledbaby Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Well, finally a decision goes our way. That is to say the way for real Americans and not those pantywaist socialist liberal dodo birds. But why the Supreme court took 40 years to affirm a right so clearly enumerated in the Bill Of Rights is a mystery to me. Obviously the Washington D.C. law prohibiting citizens from owning a handgun in their homes was draconian. So why do these damn courts take forever to figure that shit out? Now let's start taking other stuff back and clean this county up once and for all! Right on, I sure don't wanna damage my golf clubs when there are such easier solutions "Any questions?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Zeppnile Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 DC Gun Ban Blown Away by Ted Nugent Posted: 06/26/2008 As I swab down one of my hundreds of privately owned, individually possessed firearms again this fine morning, I snicker and shake my head in disbelief that there are four "justices" on the "supreme" court that do not believe Americans have individual rights. Sure, I am somewhat pleased that we now have a SCOTUS confirmation of the self-evident truth and God given individual right to keep and bear arms, but the 5-4 ruling is another painful example, like Guantanamo and the decree against the death penalty for child rapist decisions that indicate a divisive culture war raging on, and four supreme justices frighteningly disconnected from the heart and soul of America. Certain that God gave each of us the individual gift of life, and so very relieved that our founding fathers were prudent enough to write these self-evident truths down on paper for future reference, everybody I know needs no confirmation whatsoever that self defense, individual self defense is not only a God given right, but a moral imperative in the hearts and souls of good people everywhere. Just as we wouldn't need confirmation that our choice of religion is indeed an individual right, or that we could possibly need a government permit to express our individual thoughts in speech, good Americans will continue to fight for the return of our sacred 2nd Amendment rights where someday soon we will not need a government issued license to keep and bear arms. After all, from the supreme court of common sense on the not so mean streets of America, everybody I know understands clearly that "keep" means one thing and one thing only: "It's mine and you can't have it". We know without question that "bear" can only mean, "Yes, I have it right here in my hands or within instant grasp", nothing more and nothing less. And dare I explain “shall not be infringed?" I hope not. That these self-evident truths have been bastardized to the point of "gun free zones" is nothing less than heart breaking in America today. Everybody knows that it is in these anti-American, anti-Constitutional "gun free zones" where innocent people are forced into unarmed helplessness and where the highest body count of innocents are stacked up by evil perpetrators celebrating the condition of helpless sheep to slaughter. Since the insane gun ban, Washington, D.C. has been a violent criminal's dream environment where they are assured no resistance. That is a bizarre, immoral condition and a direct result of the cult of feel good liberals who could care less about dead good people as they wring their hands worrying about the rights of the most evil amongst us. For shame. I am responsible for my personal defense and the defense of my family. Our Founding Fathers clearly believed this as well. Evidence shows that 9-1-1 is a last-ditch call for a clean up crew to sift through the aftermath of criminal activity. I can’t imagine allowing myself to be unarmed, helpless and reliant upon the heroes of law enforcement, who, though always do the best that they can do, cannot and will not be there when we need them. They represent damage control all too often, when quality control is in the hands of responsible individuals. The same Supreme Court determined long ago that cops have no lawful obligation to protect us from anything. Self defense is our job. Thank God the Supreme Court got it right by striking down the D.C. gun ban, legalizing personal protection in the nation’s capitol and now across America, thereby guaranteeing our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, rights bestowed to us by God, the supreme authority. D.C. has been a cesspool of crime for years. This ruling confirms the rights of good people the ability to defend themselves against bad people. Who could possibly find fault with that supreme dose of common sense? Banning guns hasn't worked to deter crime or make communities safer, in fact just the opposite. All gun bans have ever accomplished is the creation of guaranteed victims. This has been supremely sad, wrong-headed and dangerous. Most of us cannot imagine the thought process by which bureaucrats and courts could force laws on good people rendering us disarmed and helpless, then turn around and send us the bill for their armed security. Obama, what say you? Various thugs, punks, crack heads and other devils who have victimized innocents at will are on a long overdue notice with this ruling. Good ultimately conquers evil as it should be. With Independence Day right around the corner, the Supreme Court has affirmed that indeed Americans are independent and have the right to the most basic of rights -- the right to defend themselves against tyranny whatever ugly form it may take. Now the good people of America must fight harder and relentlessly to regain all of our lost Second Amendment rights in each state and city where unarmed helplessness continues, Mayor Daley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chef free Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 About time they took a stand! I always thought it was total bullshit to assert the framers meant "states" when they wrote "people". The rest of the constitution clearly uses the two terms seperately! However the ruling seems to leave some room for some restrictions on gun ownership. Now if we could get them to address the idea of "bearing" arms, it seems to me to mean carry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 They WILL NOT strip me of my guns. We should see what Ted Nugent has to say about it. I know a few people here who think like I do on this issue, this is no bull shit issue. If your nuts, or a criminal fine, illegal. Ted's extremely knowledgeable on these issues and a very articulate spokesman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hickory Man Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Ted's extremely knowledgeable on these issues and a very articulate spokesman. I'm just glad he found his true calling in life, and has quit trying to be a serious musician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake of Shadows Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I'm just glad he found his true calling in life, and has quit trying to be a serious musician. ~~~~~~~~~~~ I'm rather pleased with the Court as well. I see it as more of a 'clarification' of an individual's right vs. a state militia thing, and I agree with that. The Court also said some restrictions were not unreasonable, and I agree with that as well. I get real tired of people taking this to the extreme... either extreme. I don't think either extreme is right and I think both "sides" have some very valid points. Yes, I know how to shoot. No, I don't personally own one, but I have in the past and I certainly still have near instant access to them. I'm not in a hurry to go buy one. I just wish people would use some sense, open their ears, and shut their mouths long enough to listen to something besides the 'holy shit, the sky is falling because...' that each 'side' seems to gravitate towards. *disclaimer* I quit going to the gun thread quite awhile ago when it was obviously just an excuse to celebrate what big dicks guns everybody had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirchzep27 Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 A very decisive week for washington i guess...just seems strange, or out of the blue, to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mangani Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Well good for you guys. I too think it's the right decision. As for bringing up Ted Nugent though, sorry but he's a tosspot nutjob. Anybody who actually listens to anything that tool says really shouldn't. Regardless if he's right or wrong on this particular subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledbaby Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Ted's extremely knowledgeable on these issues and a very articulate spokesman. Maybe he should become a solid ass kisser...he does what he wants instead of following The Queens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledbaby Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Well good for you guys. I too think it's the right decision. As for bringing up Ted Nugent though, sorry but he's a tosspot nutjob. Anybody who actually listens to anything that tool says really shouldn't. Regardless if he's right or wrong on this particular subject. He is a bit off the wall. Have to agree on that one. But the idea is he doesnt sway with what persons are wanting FOR THE MOMENT Being articulate? I have no idea, dont know him. Some of his music is cool, thats my main focus. Wouldnt pay to see him, well or you for that matter. Oh yeah when you and Jones come to America, we will hide all the guns and give you coloring books of guns and put you in a playpen. We really dont want you hurting yourself. Edit: By the way Ted Nugent was being used as a sort of extremest humorous example. I dont really think Nugent takes himself seriously much of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledbaby Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 ~~~~~~~~~~~ I'm rather pleased with the Court as well. I see it as more of a 'clarification' of an individual's right vs. a state militia thing, and I agree with that. The Court also said some restrictions were not unreasonable, and I agree with that as well. I get real tired of people taking this to the extreme... either extreme. I don't think either extreme is right and I think both "sides" have some very valid points. Yes, I know how to shoot. No, I don't personally own one, but I have in the past and I certainly still have near instant access to them. I'm not in a hurry to go buy one. I just wish people would use some sense, open their ears, and shut their mouths long enough to listen to something besides the 'holy shit, the sky is falling because...' that each 'side' seems to gravitate towards. *disclaimer* I quit going to the gun thread quite awhile ago when it was obviously just an excuse to celebrate what big dicks guns everybody had. Penis Envy is not the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pb Derigable Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I kinda of a flip flopper. I am a strong believer in the 2nd amendment But i do believe local cities can have a ban on some guns to suit their needs. But why handguns? Washington should do what Chicago did. Don't ban handguns, but just don't allow them to be registered and require that all guns be registered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrum Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 Ted's extremely knowledgeable on these issues and a very articulate spokesman. I never cared for his music and he looked ridiculous on 'That 70's Show' But I wouldn't want to be in his crosshairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.