NationStates Jolt Archive

The showdown is going to commence at the Nation's highest court as the U.S. Supreme Court is going to hear arguments about the legality of the handgun ban in the District of Columbia

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/20/AR2007112000893.html?hpid=topnews

The Supreme Court announced today that it will decide whether the District of Columbia's ban on handguns violates the Constitution, a choice that will put the justices at the center of the controversy over the meaning of the Second Amendment for the first time in nearly 70 years.

The court's decision could have broad implications for gun-control measures locally and across the country and will raise a hotly contested political issue just in time for the 2008 elections.

The court will likely hear the case in March, with a decision coming before justices adjourn at the end of June.

Before this turns into a flamefest, leave the flamethrowers at home.

Good. It's about time we get a real, modern decision about the 2nd amendment.

I predict a 6-3 decision affirming the lower court's ruling.

Before this turns into a flamefest, leave the flamethrowers at home.But, but it's a handgun ban... :(

The reaction by the Brady Bunch is to beg for money and decry "activist judges".

Here's the link from SCOTUSblog (http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/court-agrees-to-rule-on-gun-case/)

Second amendment gives the right to bear arms.. it doesn't specify what kind of arms!

I vote we ban everything but those muskets that take ten minutes to reload. That'd really take the edge out of driveby shootings.

*Bam!*

"Goddamit, we missed. Could you stand still fill for a few minutes?"

Second amendment gives the right to bear arms.. it doesn't specify what kind of arms!

I vote we ban everything but those muskets that take ten minutes to reload. That'd really take the edge out of driveby shootings.

*Bam!*

"Goddamit, we missed. Could you stand still fill for a few minutes?"

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/2000455272489756911_rs.jpg

...in other words, good idea. :p

I'm just glad we're finally going to get some constitutional guidance on this issue. The SCOTUS has been silent on this issue for too long.

So if the handguns win, is D.C. Banned?

That they will agree with the lower court is barely a question in my mind. What should be more interesting are the opinions. How far does the right to bare arms extend?
BTW, as a DC resident, I'm elated the pistol ban is gone. Homocides skyrocketed in the early 1990s. They're calmer now, but still pretty high. Since criminals can find ways to get guns, shouuldn't honest people, too?

I'm just glad we're finally going to get some constitutional guidance on this issue. The SCOTUS has been silent on this issue for too long.

70 odd years.

That they will agree with the lower court is barely a question in my mind. What should be more interesting are the opinions. How far does the right to bare arms extend?
BTW, as a DC resident, I'm elated the pistol ban is gone. Homocides skyrocketed in the early 1990s. They're calmer now, but still pretty high. Since criminals can find ways to get guns, shouuldn't honest people, too?

That's what has been argued.

Good. It's about time we get a real, modern decision about the 2nd amendment.

I predict a 6-3 decision affirming the lower court's ruling.

Unless the lower court ruled "handout guns to every man, woman, and child," I doubt that is going to be the outcome given the conservative stacked bench.

Hey, it's not like the handgun ban demands a slice at each shoulder.

So if the handguns win, is D.C. Banned?

It would certainly make this country a better place.

Interesting times!

I sincerely hope they do the right thing and this gross violation of our sacred, constitutionally protected rights is ended at last.

But if handguns are actually banned....

Then...

WHO WILL I BE!?!?! :eek:
/identitycrisis

Just yet another Banned, out of thousands of Banned.
:(
*shuffles to the corner, lies down, and curls up in the fetal position whimpering*

But if handguns are actually banned....

Then...

WHO WILL I BE!?!?! :eek:
/identitycrisis

Just yet another Banned, out of thousands of Banned.

:(
*shuffles to the corner, lies down, and curls up in the fetal position whimpering*

Banned Two Four Six Oh One,
Your time is up
And your parole's begun
You know what that means.

:p

Banned Two Four Six Oh One,
Your time is up
And your parole's begun
You know what that means.

:p

Yes, it means I'm free.

Yes, it means I'm free.

But you have to live in Hoboken

Yes, it means I'm free.

No!
It means you get
Your yellow sticker-of-self
You are a banned

:p

No!
It means you get
Your yellow sticker-of-self
You are a banned

:p

Never having seen Les Miserables, I cannot continue the script any further.
But...
*steals your bread and flees*

Never having seen Les Miserables, I cannot continue the script any further.
But...
*steals your bread and flees*

*captures*

Five years for what you did
The rest because you tried to run
Yes, two four six oh one.

:p

I sincerely hope they do the right thing and this gross violation of our sacred, constitutionally protected rights is ended at last.

The irony being of course that residents of DC dont even have representation in Congress let alone worry about guns.

This seems like an open and shut case.

"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."

See how it says the right of the people, not the right the of the militia?

How far does the right to bare arms extend?

To just above the elbow.

the issue is that people are using guns to kill and mame each other, a little too often and irrisponsibly. banning possession of anything solves nothing and only creates 'black' markets, and opportunities for politically motivated abuse.

the only real solution to that kind of situation is not to ban possession of anything, but rather its manufacture, sale, or wholesale importation.

a solution cameroi is whole heartedly in favor of. that way, instead of government OR criminals having guns, only gun making hobbiest would have them, or at least have to be turned to in order to aquire them.

this would elevate and protect the honor (and lives) of all tecnological hobbiest as they have so long well deserved to be and been denied.

mass production is mass production though, and even hobbiests could be criminalzed if they cross the line of making more then three effectively identical such objects.

=^^=
.../\...

To just above the elbow.

Screw you liberal commie baby eating islamofascist! It goes all the way up to the shoulder!

But if handguns are actually banned....

Then...

WHO WILL I BE!?!?! :eek:
/identitycrisis

Some one who hates horses?

So if the handguns win, is D.C. Banned?

I hope so. :)

I am hoping that the appeal to SCOTUS gets SHOT down!!!! :D

However, I doubt that it will.

I'd like to point out two interesting comments Penn Jillette made about gun control...

"[some person] thinks only police should be allowed to carry guns. Perhaps he would think differently if he were black or hispanic from south/central L.A."

"Can you even imagine a mass murder at a gun show? You couldn't even point the gun and they'd get you."

Just throwing those into the debate...

Gun control means using both hands. Seriously, the only guns I see being worth banning are automatic assault rifles. Assualt rifles are used to kill people in large quantities. I doubt when you're protecting your family from an intruder you're looking to pull out an M16 or AK. There has to been some logical reasoning while protecting the right to bear arms.

This is such a split issue for me. On the one hand, handguns are dangerous, and if people ever get drunk and grab their gun, they endanger everyone around. On the other hand, I don't want the government restricting how I may live. I'm gonna have to say that I hope (and am pretty sure) that the court will rule against this ban.

I am hoping that the appeal to SCOTUS gets SHOT down!!!! :D

However, I doubt that it will.

For once CH and I are in agreement. It's nice that you finally came around.

Screw you liberal commie baby eating islamofascist! It goes all the way up to the shoulder!

You will end up with cold dead hands if you bare that much arm.

You gotta give it to the six who brought the case, they're not the traditional image of a gun-rights activist group. There are homosexual rights activists and community activists amongst them. Quite interesting, and a well chosen crowd.

So, I say it's time that DC joins the rest of the country in getting the right to bear arms, as well as the right to have representation in the House and Senate, too. The disenfranchised of the city deserve their rights.

You will end up with cold dead hands if you bare that much arm.

You can have my cold, dead hands, when you pry them from my cold, dead hands!

For once CH and I are in agreement. It's nice that you finally came around.
You are hoping that the appeal will get SHOT down? :eek:

You are hoping that the appeal will get SHOT down? :eek:

Yep. Now try and figure out why.

Human on Human crime has been around long before any Government has been around. It can be a rock,stick,club,knife,bone,your hands it doesn't matter if that trigger in you is tripped you will kill (or be killed).

This right is to protect us not from each other but for us to have the resources to protect us from another Government and our Government.
DON'T let the wording and the emotional logic distort the real issue - the inability to fight back. Whats next pointy knives?

You are hoping that the appeal will get SHOT down? :eek:

Um. The Court of Appeals ruled that there was an individual right to own firearms that was violated by the D.C. gun laws. The appeal is an attempt to get the Supreme Court to overturn that ruling. So Kecibukia would like to see the appeal fail and the Court of Appeals decision be affirmed.

You presumably want the appeal to succeed and for the Supreme Court to rule the D.C. laws do not violate the Second Amendment.

Um. The Court of Appeals ruled that there was an individual right to own firearms that was violated by the D.C. gun laws. The appeal is an attempt to get the Supreme Court to overturn that ruling. So Kecibukia would like to see the appeal fail and the Court of Appeals decision be affirmed.
Um, Er, Oh...it is all so confusing!! :D

You presumably want the appeal to succeed and for the Supreme Court to rule the D.C. laws do not violate the Second Amendment.
Yes....yes...that is exactly what I want to happen. Thanks for pointing out my faux pas!! :)

Um, Er, Oh...it is all so confusing!! :D


Yes....yes...that is exactly what I want to happen. Thanks for pointing out my faux pas!! :)

I was wondering how long it would take to catch on. :)

But if handguns are actually banned....

Then...

WHO WILL I BE!?!?! :eek:
/identitycrisis

Handguns

Handguns

That actually makes a great deal of sense.

We all have the right ot bear arms. A ban on arms is a blatent violation of my Second Amenmant Rights. So, yeah, I hope they call it unconstitutional.

We all have the right ot bear arms. A ban on arms is a blatent violation of my Second Amenmant Rights. So, yeah, I hope they call it unconstitutional.

It's already been called unconstitutional by a federal district court. Apparently, the appeal to the Supreme Court is to try to prove the handgun ban is constitutional.

BTW, I hope the district court's ruling is upheld, and the handgun ban is struck down.

It's already been called unconstitutional by a federal district court. Apparently, the appeal to the Supreme Court is to try to prove the handgun ban is constitutional.

BTW, I hope the district court's ruling is upheld, and the handgun ban is struck down.

Not that I actually disagree, but somehow, someone called "Gun Manufacturers" being anti gun control doesn't seem a huge leap...:D

Not that I actually disagree, but somehow, someone called "Gun Manufacturers" being anti gun control doesn't seem a huge leap...:D

Hehe. Actually, my name is due to the Sound and Fury portions of the NationStates forums (I used to lurk mostly there, then switched to General, and recently started to go back there more regularly).

This sshouldn't take them long, just read the damn thing.

The right of the people to bear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kodiak_Brown_Bear.jpg) arms shall not be infringed.

It seems sorta silly to make a...well...federal case out of this. Rather than looking at the constitutionality of the ban, wouldn't it be much better to look at whether or not the policy is actually working?

Not if it violates a basic individual right, in which case the policy would be illegitimate even if it worked.

It seems sorta silly to make a...well...federal case out of this. Rather than looking at the constitutionality of the ban, wouldn't it be much better to look at whether or not the policy is actually working?

DC being the murder capital of the US, IIRC, I'd suggest it isn't. That should really be good enough for the DC legislature, right?

No, you're using logic. The anti-gun lobby in the US has no use for that; only ideology.

It seems sorta silly to make a...well...federal case out of this. Rather than looking at the constitutionality of the ban, wouldn't it be much better to look at whether or not the policy is actually working?

DC being the murder capital of the US, IIRC, I'd suggest it isn't. That should really be good enough for the DC legislature, right?

http://blog.stanford.edu/unofficial/BT-secondamendment-gallery-835.jpg

Banned Two Four Six Oh One,
Your time is up
And your parole's begun
You know what that means.

:p

It means he's free?

NO! It means he gets his yellow ticket-of-leave....

No, you're using logic. The anti-gun lobby in the US has no use for that; only ideology.
Because the pro-gun lobby is run by Vulcans :rolleyes:

Because the pro-gun lobby is run by Vulcans :rolleyes:

No, the pro gun lobby is clearly run by the Klingons.

Because the pro-gun lobby is run by Vulcans :rolleyes:

Not hardly. But they don't have to ignore evidence to maintain their position.

No, the pro gun lobby is clearly run by the Klingons.
Vulcans had guns. They nuked their own planet and cut and crushed each other with spears and hammers. Vulcans were really violent and sometimes still are. Every 7 years. When they rape someone. It's called Pon Farr. How can you call yourself a trekkie and not know vulcan history and culture?

I'm surprised there is not more arrogance/ignorance shown here. I commend many of you.

However, there was ONE comment made by someone, saying that the only arms that should be banned are "automatic assault rifles".

In the US, can ANYONE name 10 instances in 10 years (which is not many, mind you) where "automatic assault weapons" were used in killing ANYONE? Beltway sniper (semi-automatic rifle, stolen), I remember an asian gentleman shooting some rednecks with an AK-47 (also semi-automatic, legally owned, also possibly in self defense). I cannot recall any other instances, in a country of 300,000,000. With probably just as many firearms.

The United States is not like other countries. We are not Great Britain - we are not France, or Germany. We, as a people, fought and died for our own independence. Surely, we had help from other nations such as France and Russia - but the colonists had a large majority of the fighting left to bear on their shoulders. I would assert that very few, if any, anti-gun supporters even recall HOW the Battle of Lexington was sparked, or what the reasoning behind the confiscation of colonists firearms was happening. Those weapons were their equivelant of "assault rifles" - I mean, why would you EVER need one of those? :p

Also, it is valid to note that most mass shootings have not occurred by "automatic assault rifles", unless you deem any military action as a "mass shooting" (which they are). They have been perpetrated by individuals intent on taking revenge out on as many as possible - mostly with handguns. however, if people don't know or don't recall, wikipedia 'Charles Whitman'. He simply used a hunting rifle (with the exception of the M1 carbine, which I seriously doubt was used for any shooting at range because of it's ineffectiveness, far, far less effective than the bolt-action Remington 700 he was using) for the long range killing/wounding. If large capacity magazines get banned, why wouldn't you just switch to using a 30-06 which typically is a 4+1? You could kill multiple people with one shot if the environment is right.

I say, if we pass gun laws, military and police need to be included in those restrictions, as well.

Vulcans had guns. They nuked their own planet and cut and crushed each other with spears and hammers. Vulcans were really violent and sometimes still are. Every 7 years. When they rape someone. It's called Pon Farr. How can you call yourself a trekkie and not know vulcan history and culture?

What part of that didnt you think i knew? Hell i was born right around the time Star Trek was Prime Time TV and Shatner was young. :P I used to call my ex gf my little Vulcan because it seemed like it was 7 years between the times she got horney.Ahh good times.