WHAAAWHOOO THE GOOD GUYS WIN ONE

[BELT_FED]

For those of you that don't keep up with gun laws you really should take a look at the suppreme courts ruling yesterday(june 28th). A 30 year ban on handguns in chicago was found unconstitutional... maybe one day librals will learn that they can't just take rights away just because they want to... sorry for the rant but I'm excited... now if we can just get this firearms freedom act to fly...

[lonejacklarry]

I'm pretty excited about it, too.

I am concerned, however, that the vote was 5-4. Roughly half of these learned legal scholars have a completely different estimation of what the 2nd Amendment states-in plain English in MY opinion.

It would appear that the vote should have been 9-0. Again, in MY opinion!

This battle has been won but "the war" certainly has not!

Obligatory 15-22 content: I have the day off and have a fresh 550 pack packed and ready to go.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Per our kind and generous Administrator -

"A good day worthy of celebration, so I left this here instead of moving it to the 2A area."

Feel free to discuss (Please no political rants/hyperbole else our kind Administrator's generosity will abruptly end with this)

[thehaggis]

Hey! I'm liberal, and I'm all for gun rights, not nanny-state "gun-control" fear-n-ignorance legislation. imho the main reason the vote was 5-4 is because SCOTUS has stopped being about the law and become more about politics and toeing the party line. So long separation of the Branches.

[JSR III]

All the more reason that we must vote out all of the antis in the upcoming Fall elections. Should we lose one vote on the high court, that decision would have been 5-4 against.

[raveneap]

An excellent ruling without question - but, as was said, I'd rather it was 9-0 than 5-4. But, it's a win!

[whoppo]

Regaining our rights and freedoms.... one step at a time.

[lalodad]

Good day for gun owners. Better days will come in november-I hope

[BELT_FED]

im totally agree with larry.. but i cant help but think that the 4 that voted against it should be impeached, mainly because they swore to uphold the constitution and they didnt do that in anyway they let their personal feelings or probably pockets deside their vote... there has never been any doubt what the 2nd stated but they have allways tried to say that times have changed and its not applicable anymore... the right to keep and bear arms is pretty clear.. if you go back and read quotes from the founding fathers its very clear what they ment by it.. but it was a great day for those of us that enjoy the sport maybe Cali and NY will get the op to enjoy some of the same freedoms as the rest of us... i hate to say it but Sara P. had one quote about gun rights that stuck with me(probably the only thing she said that did) but she said if you have the right to bear arms in one state you should have that right in another.. or something along those lines.. im just happy that 5 justices can read...

[blvdbuzzard]

Yes it is a GREAT ruling. But what scares me is, as others have said, the decision was 5 to 4. So what in the heck are the other 4 people thinking?

I wonder if they will use this to help us in Kalifornia.


Buzz.

[chingachkook]

Originally Posted by BELT_FED

im totally agree with larry.. but i cant help but think that the 4 that voted against it should be impeached, mainly because they swore to uphold the constitution and they didnt do that in anyway they let their personal feelings or probably pockets deside their vote... there has never been any doubt what the 2nd stated but they have allways tried to say that times have changed and its not applicable anymore... the right to keep and bear arms is pretty clear.. if you go back and read quotes from the founding fathers its very clear what they ment by it.. but it was a great day for those of us that enjoy the sport maybe Cali and NY will get the op to enjoy some of the same freedoms as the rest of us... i hate to say it but Sara P. had one quote about gun rights that stuck with me(probably the only thing she said that did) but she said if you have the right to bear arms in one state you should have that right in another.. or something along those lines.. im just happy that 5 justices can read...

I couldn't agree more with what Belt Fed stated here, but there is one flaw with all of our thinking. That flaw being that our rights and freedoms are not granted by SCOTUS or any other branch of government, but by God alone. Our forefathers knew that truth very well and fought to preserve those rights and freedoms and it's time we fought back as well in the preservation of those rights and freedoms for the next generation, make informed wise decisions in the voting booth come November...

[ChattanoogaPhil]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the states. For example: Will banning the possession of a firearm for 10 days (arbitrary waiting period) be a violation of an individual's Constitutional rights?

[wbear]

Originally Posted by JSR III

All the more reason that we must vote out all of the antis in the upcoming Fall elections. Should we lose one vote on the high court, that decision would have been 5-4 against.

That is why it is SO important a democrat does not get elected in 2 years or another Kagan will be appointed when Justice Kennedy retires. I do not believe he can last another 6 years and hold on till 2016. Due to the ages of the rest of the justices and the fact they are in lifetime positions not defeating the democrats in 2012 will likely result in even your grandchildren not being able to change the court. Who gets to appoint the next justice will be the most important political contest of our lifetimes, not just because of guns but everything that is red white and blue. We must pay any price, perform any task to make sure a liberal is not elected in 2012.

[HalfSwiss]

There are so many uninformed people out there. The local paper just printed a letter from a guy that was mad about the Supreme Court's decision because it weakened States' rights. He said the sovereignty of states, not individuals, was protected by the Second Amendment. He either never had a course on the Constitution or he slept through it.

[chingachkook]

Originally Posted by HalfSwiss

There are so many uninformed people out there. The local paper just printed a letter from a guy that was mad about the Supreme Court's decision because it weakened States' rights. He said the sovereignty of states, not individuals, was protected by the Second Amendment. He either never had a course on the Constitution or he slept through it.

I'm with ya HalfSwiss, it's pretty disgusting when "We The People" haven't the slighest idea or even interest to know how bad we're getting shafted by the left wing social engineers. My gosh America WAKE UP.

[Gunhacker]

Originally Posted by blvdbuzzard

Yes it is a GREAT ruling. But what scares me is, as others have said, the decision was 5 to 4. So what in the heck are the other 4 people thinking?

I wonder if they will use this to help us in Kalifornia.


Buzz.

You can bet your behind that this decision will be used to help us.

There are groups such as the Calguns Foundation and the California Rifle & Pistol Association (Official NRA state affiliate) that have been waiting for the ruling to go our way to begin a systematic plan of challenging our draconian gun laws in the CA courts.

Things are about to get "interesting" here .

[rakusi]

Anybody not see something like this coming?
yahoo link

So you can have a handgun... in your home. Good luck if you need it to defend yourself outside your home... because, you know, violent crimes and muggings never take place outside of someone's home

[blvdbuzzard]

You know us gun owners are causing so much trouble. We follow the law, do not cause crime, we do not shoot up the liquor store for $20.00 and rob people at the ATM's.

Now if these bone headed people would get as fired up about the real people doing bad things we might be able to have a nice place to live. Yet the come after us like banshee's.

I do hope they challenge all of the stupid gun laws out here. They are getting ready to vote on a long gun registration bill that would keep all info on file for ever, just like they do for hand guns. Another waste of money that will do nothing but raise the deficit and make it sound like they are doing something. But only thing they are really doing is making more money for the GOV.

Anyway, glad there are few people out there that can think for themselves and understand what is going on.


Buzz.

[eff2point8]

After reading a little on Chicago's situation I was wondering this...

Of all of the crimes committed with a handgun, how many are with registered handguns as opposed to unregistered handguns?

In any city, in any state - anywhere? Is there a source for this info?

I don't know of any instances where I live of a registered handgun being used in a crime, but I may be wrong.

Just wondering.

RB

[Jst1mr]

And there is nothing that prevents cities or states from making it practically impossible to own a gun. For instance, Chicago could require a $1000 permit and 60 days of classroom instruction to earn a permit. Such tactics may not stand up under legal scrutiny forever, but can certainly serve the strategy of delay, delay, delay...

[TurboniumOxide]

If the constitution is to be updated to modern times as the libs want then the 2a should read:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear phased plasma rifles in the 40 watt range, shall not be infringed."