Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ban handguns? Supreme Court taking a new look

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ban handguns? Supreme Court taking a new look

    Concealed weapons permits are fantastic. I know, some here will call it warped and fanatical. That's ok. I see the effect, and you don't.
    Chicago is actually helping gun supporters.

    06:41 PM CDT on Wednesday, September 30, 2009
    Associated Press

    WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court says it will take up a challenge to Chicago's ban on handguns, opening the way for a ruling that could set off a vigorous new campaign to roll back state and local gun controls across the nation.

    Victory for gun-rights proponents in the Chicago case is considered likely, even by supporters of gun control, in the latest battle in the nation's long and often bitter dispute over the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. A ruling against the city's outright ban could lead to legal challenges to less-restrictive laws across the country that limit who can own guns, whether firearms must be registered and how they should be stored.

    The case is to be argued early next year.

    Last year, the justices struck down a prohibition on handguns in the District of Columbia, a city with unique federal status, as a violation of the Second Amendment. Now the court will decide whether that ruling should apply to local and state laws as well.

    The court has previously said that most, but not all, rights laid out in the Constitution's Bill of Rights serve as checks on state as well as federal restrictions. Separately, 44 state constitutions already enshrine gun rights.

    Though faced with potential limits from the high court on their ability to enact laws and regulations in this area, 34 states weighed in on the gun- rights side before the justices agreed to take the case Wednesday, an indication of the enduring strength of the National Rifle Association and its allies.

    The gun case was among several the court added to its docket for the term that begins Monday. Others include:

    • A challenge to part of a law that makes it a crime to provide financial and other aid to any group designated a terrorist organization.

    • A dispute over when new, harsher penalties can be given to sex offenders who don't register with state sex offender databases.

    • Whether to throw out a human rights lawsuit against a former prime minister of Somalia who is accused of overseeing killings and other atrocities. The issue is whether a federal law gives the former official, Mohamed Ali Samantar, immunity from lawsuits in U.S. courts.

    In the gun case, outright handgun bans appear to be limited to Chicago and suburban Oak Park, Ill. But a ruling against those ordinances probably would "open up all the gun regulations in the country to constitutional scrutiny, of which there are quite a few," said Mark Tushnet, a Harvard Law School professor whose recent book "Out of Range" explores the often bitter national debate over guns.

    Already, Alan Gura, who led the legal challenge to the Washington law and represents the plaintiff in Chicago, is suing to overturn the District of Columbia's prohibition on carrying firearms outside a person's home. Illinois and Wisconsin have similar restrictions.

    In voiding Washington's handgun ban last year, Justice Antonin Scalia suggested that gun rights, like the right to speech, are limited and that many gun control measures could remain in place.

    Ultimately, said Tushnet, the court will have to decide, possibly restriction by restriction, which limits are reasonable.

    "It's very hard to know where this court would draw the line between reasonable and unreasonable," he said.

    NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said he hopes the court rules that "core fundamental freedoms like speech, religion and, we believe, the right to keep and bear arms are intended to apply to every individual in the country."

    Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said the court's decision to take up the new case was unsurprising in light of last year's ruling.

    These cases should "take the extremes off the table," Helmke said, referring to bans on guns and unlimited gun rights. "What's critical for us is how the court goes about fleshing out what the limits are."

    The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago had upheld the gun bans as legitimate expressions of local and state rights.

    Judge Frank Easterbrook, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, wrote in the ruling that "the Constitution establishes a federal republic where local differences are to be cherished as elements of liberty rather than extirpated in order to produce a single, nationally applicable rule."

    "Federalism is an older and more deeply rooted tradition than is a right to carry any particular kind of weapon," Easterbrook wrote.

    Evaluating arguments over the extension of the Second Amendment is a job "for the justices rather than a court of appeals," he said.

    Justice Sonia Sotomayor, then an appeals court judge, was part of a three-judge panel in New York that reached a similar conclusion in January.

    The high court took the suggestion Wednesday.

    Judges on both courts — Republican nominees in Chicago and Democratic nominees in New York — said only the Supreme Court could decide whether to extend last year's ruling throughout the country.

    The New York ruling also has been challenged, but the court did not act on it Wednesday. Sotomayor would have to sit out any case involving decisions she was part of on the appeals court. Although the issue is the same in the Chicago case, there is no ethical bar to her participation in its consideration by the Supreme Court.

    She replaced Justice David Souter, who dissented in the 5-4 Washington case, so the five-justice majority remains intact.

    Several Republican senators cited the Sotomayor gun ruling, as well as her reticence on the topic at her confirmation hearing, in explaining their decision to oppose her confirmation to the high court.

    The case is McDonald v. Chicago, 08-1521.
    Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
    "Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
    He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead

  • #2
    It's been proven that, to have a well ordered militia, they must be armed with concealed handguns.

    Still, the Supreme Court is so right wing, I expect them to keep up with their judicial activism until every convicted felon is allowed to be armed with an Uzi.

    Comment


    • #3
      They should be armed with unconcealed automatic weapons and anti-tank weapons.
      Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
      Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
      We've got both kinds

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm all in favour of Americans having guns: More guns = more dead Americans!

        That can't be bad any way you look at it, especially when it's usually the stupid ones (or at least the more stupid ones) that kill themselves/each other.

        I agree with Mike - let's use Texas as a pilot state!
        Is it me, or is MOBIUS a horrible person?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Zkribbler View Post
          Still, the Supreme Court is so right wing, ...
          Now that the Court has found an individual rather than a collective right in the Second Amendment, how is the Chicago ban substantively different from the DC one.
          I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
          For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

          Comment


          • #6
            Rightist!
            “As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
            "Capitalism ho!"

            Comment


            • #7
              DD is right, this will (and should) go down.


              I know our obsession with guns is very strange and alarming to Europeans, and I can't blame them--it is very strange and alarming to me as well. However, Canada has, roughly, the same number of firearms per capita as the US--it's at least within an order of magnitude, much closer than Europe. And yet, Canada's homicide rate is much, much, much lower than the US.

              It isn't the guns, guys. There is something else, culturally or psychologically or something, that causes us to kill each other.
              "My nation is the world, and my religion is to do good." --Thomas Paine
              "The subject of onanism is inexhaustable." --Sigmund Freud

              Comment


              • #8
                Blah

                Comment


                • #9
                  Blah blah blah.....after Heller, carrying a concealed weapon in DC on the streets is just as illegal as it was pre-Heller. The only difference is that you can own and carry a gun in the four walls of your house.
                  If you look around and think everyone else is an *******, you're the *******.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Guynemer View Post
                    I know our obsession with guns is very strange and alarming to Europeans, and I can't blame them
                    I think its a product of our history. The revolution was carried out mostly by ordinary citizens gathered up in a militia with rifles and whatnot.
                    “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                    - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      So was the French Revolution.
                      Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
                      Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
                      We've got both kinds

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Yeah, but that ended up turning out not so well .
                        “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                        - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Ok, not really so much, it's a crap argument.
                          Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
                          Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
                          We've got both kinds

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            France has got great healthcare!
                            Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
                            Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
                            We've got both kinds

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Guynemer View Post
                              DD is right, this will (and should) go down.


                              I know our obsession with guns is very strange and alarming to Europeans, and I can't blame them--it is very strange and alarming to me as well. However, Canada has, roughly, the same number of firearms per capita as the US--it's at least within an order of magnitude, much closer than Europe. And yet, Canada's homicide rate is much, much, much lower than the US.

                              It isn't the guns, guys. There is something else, culturally or psychologically or something, that causes us to kill each other.
                              Let's be clear on this for the billionth time: while Canada has a somewhat similar firearms per capita figure as the US (though not really that close), our handguns per capita ratio is a tiny fraction of what you guys have. Now, I'm not saying that there aren't other factors present (I'm certain there are) leading to all the gun deaths in the US, but we absolutely do not have anywhere near the same number of handguns, per capita, kicking around.
                              "The French caused the war [Persian Gulf war, 1991]" - Ned
                              "you people who bash Bush have no appreciation for one of the great presidents in our history." - Ned
                              "I wish I had gay sex in the boy scouts" - Dissident

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X