Will the high court alter our right to own guns?
People have a right to own guns, plain and simple, according to a majority of Supreme Court justices on Tuesday. Still, the justices are less clear about whether the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns should remain.
Arguments on D.C.’s gun ban could bring the high court’s first interpretation of the Second Amendment since it was ratified 216 years ago.
According to today’s story:
The central question before the court on Tuesday was whether the right to keep and bear arms applies to individuals or only to states and militias. At issue was the constitutionality of the ban on handguns in Washington, D.C. — the toughest law of its kind in the nation.
A ruling in the closely watched effort to invalidate Washington’s handgun law could cause cities and states to rewrite anti-gun measures. It also could trigger lawsuits challenging federal statutes that ban machine guns and firearms made of plastic.
The D.C. law bars people from owning unregistered handguns — but the city stopped registering handguns more than three decades ago, so there is no way a D.C. resident could legally register their weapons.
Like the saying goes, if the U.S. Supreme Court takes away our right to own and use guns, only criminals will have guns.
Do you think that the high court will alter our basic constitutional right to own guns?
DC is not alone, Chicago has a near identical handgun ban. Like DC, they don’t call it a ban, they just prohibit unregistered handguns (but they don’t register handguns, so it’s a “Catch 22” ban).
Anyway, I think our second amendment rights will be strengthened by this case. My guess is the SCOTUS will finally clarify the second amendment and confirm that it applies to an individuals right to keep and bear arms, not a collective “regulated militia”. I also think they will reaffirm the governments right to regulate firearm ownership (full auto, silenced, etc). However, I think they will find that DC type bans on handguns are unconstitutional. It’s one thing to make a gun owner jump through some hoops, it’s another to outright ban guns.
No handguns for civilians…….only police and soldiers of war.Too dangerous for us regular people.
From the banter by the SCOTUS members , I suspect that the lawer court’s ruling will be affirmed , but some provision will be made to allow legislative bodies to restrict certain people from having them, people convicted of violent crimes, and people adjudicated to be a danger to themselves and others. are two examples.
Make it work the way other constitutional rights work. Example, we have freedom of speech, but that is modified by slander laws. We have freedom of the press, but that is modified by libel. laws.
I want to make it clear, that those who choose not to have a handgun, or any other fiream, YOU HAVE THE ABSOLUTE RIGHT NOT TO OWN ONE.
I remind all of you that the Police has no duty or obligation to proctect an individual from anything. The SCOTUS DECIDED THAT YEARS AGO.
momama. If your #2 was sacrcasm, I bit. I thought it your honest belief. I am going to answer you based on my belief you were being straight forward and that was your honest belief.
You are entitled to police service, not police protection. The difference? Here is an example: Do you have a police officer standing in front of your house 24/7 to protect you? If not, you have police service. That’s means the police will come to your house after a crime has comitted against you and take a report..
If you choose not to protect you and yours, that is your ABSOLUTE RIGHT.
It is my right to protect myself, and others.
Anonoman:, re #1. Illinois has the most convoluted firearms laws in the nation. Here is how silly they are.
When I was in Alaska, I planned to come to Illinois to go quail hunting. I looked at the law governing bringing a firearm into the state. It says I must have a hunting license to do so. No problem. I called the State’s Department OF FISH AND GAME to buy my hunting license. They told me that I had to be in the state to buy a license…!!!!!!!! I couldn’t land In Illinois with a dissasebled shotgun without the possibility of being charged with a felony.
Logically I called The State Police, and the county police in three counties, and announced I was arriving in Evansville on X flight, had a car rental and would notify them of the licence number of the car. They knew the route I would be taking to hunt quail. suggested they keep their officers off that roule for THEIR safety.
The next morning FED X delivered me a hunting license to Alaska hunt quail in ILLINOIS.
Problem solved? Yes, and No. I arrived at the motel two days before quail season started.. Four different police officers came to the motel to “meet me” and two invited me to go hunting with them. I did.. I taught them to shoot. moving targets.
When I moved down to Illinois, Police officers comprise 50 percent of my friends,. They come to my house for barbecues,, and bring their families. Kids go down to my dock and go fishing.
And, Illinois advertises our Deer season to entice people from other states to come. Thousands do. It has a material effect on the economy of Southern Illinois.
Every hunter that comes from another state without a hunting license is subject to being charged with a felony…….the law has not changed since I came down to shoot quail.
Johnh,
You’re just lucky you didn’t have to buy ammunition on the trip. You can’t buy ammo in IL without a FOID card.
PS – I hope you know that your Alaska carry permit is NOT valid in IL.
Which makes me wonder, when you come to St. Louis, your gun has to be carried unloaded with the ammunition in a separate area of the car. When you cross the bridge into MO, where do you stop to unpack, load, and conceal your firearm? Do you stop at the same place to disarm before you cross the bridge back into the “Land of Lincoln”?
Johnh-My congratulations. That was 3 posts in a row without a single misspelling that I detected. Keep up the good work. I was wondering if you could also teach our military to shoot.
At something in the neighborhood of 25,000 rounds per kill that will start to run into some real money before too long.
Ooops- sorry, dropped a zero-it’s 250,000 per kill.
Anonoman: re # 6, yes I have everything in order, now that I moved to Illinois.. I know the law, and do not conceal carry in Illinois. I have suggested that pullouts on the bridge be made on the Missouri side so disabled cars can get off the bridge and not impede traffic. If that is done I will use that them to .:) If they don’t make them, I’ll ask the St. Louis Chamber of Commerce where they recommend.
Slam, If the SCOTUS rules that only members of malitias may bear arms. I will form a malita. I have always wanted to be a warlord. I’ll start taking applications for a bugler first Do you want to try out? I can promise you that it won’t take 250,000 rounds to kill somebody. I can teach anybody to shoot accurately from any position that is used in shooting. Do you want to be a charter member?
Most of you gun freaks have already proven many times over you are too stupid to own weapons. Try a big nightstick instead and save us all some grief. I see scared men running around with guns while women run without them. Yet women face more dangers every day. They want to carry guns on american soil, yet send women to fight their wars. The world is watching and we KNOW american men are cowardly and lack a lot in many areas. We laugh at you and enjoy your defeats.