20 Nov
Posted by Macranger as Guns, News, SCOTUS, Second Admendment, gun rights
The story…
“The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether the District of Columbia can ban handguns, a case that could produce the most in-depth examination of the constitutional right to “keep and bear arms” in nearly 70 years.
The justices’ decision to hear the case could make the divisive debate over guns an issue in the 2008 presidential and congressional elections.
The government of Washington, D.C., is asking the court to uphold its 31-year ban on handgun ownership in the face of a federal appeals court ruling that struck down the ban as incompatible with the Second Amendment. Tuesday’s announcement was widely expected, especially after both the District and the man who challenged the handgun ban asked for the high court review.
The main issue before the justices is whether the Second Amendment of the Constitution protects an individual’s right to own guns or instead merely sets forth the collective right of states to maintain militias. The former interpretation would permit fewer restrictions on gun ownership.
Gun-control advocates say the Second amendment was intended to insure that states could maintain militias, a response to 18th century fears of an all-powerful national government. Gun rights proponents contend the amendment gives individuals the right to keep guns for private uses, including self-defense.
Alan Gura, a lawyer for the D.C. residents who challenged the ban, said he was pleased that the justices were considering the case.
“We believe the Supreme Court will acknowledge that, while the use of guns can be regulated, a complete prohibition on all functional firearms is too extreme,” Gura said. “It’s time to end this unconstitutional disaster. It’s time to restore a basic freedom to all Washington residents.”
And I believe he is right.
However others like over at HotAir think different:
“Fearless prediction: Get ready to give up those guns, kids, because this one’s going the other way. And you know damned well whom you’ll have to thank. The Gipper!”
Well, as Charleston Heston said, “When you can rip it from my cold dead hands”. Better yet, as John Lennon said, “You say you want a revolution?”
Regardless of how the Supremes rule, after 200 plus years private gun ownership will not cease and while I’m not for toppling the governement, I’ll make my own fearless prediction.
Don’t try us.
Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac. Starting at just $149.95 with free shipping.
Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard: Order today and get free shipping at the Apple Store!
Mac gifts they'll love. Give a customized Mac and accessories with free shipping.
Discover® Student Card-No Annual Fee
Blogroll
Recent Comments
Recent Posts
Categories
Archives
Tags
Anbar
Barack Obama
Bin Laden
Bob Novak
Brian Williams
Bush
CAIR
call to arms
Chemical Castration
Chuck Schumer
CIA
Conspiracy debunking
democrats
Election
Election 2008
Elections
Fundraising
GOP
Governor Bobby Jindal
humor
Iran
Iraq
Israel
james risen
Jesse Jackson
John McCain
Leaks
Lobbyists
Louisiana
Maliki
media bias
Media Elite
MSM
Obama
Obama Records
Oil
Politics
racism
scott mclellan
Senator Rockefeller
Site Maintenance
surge
Tim Russert
Tony Snow
War on Terror
One Response
Right Voices » Blog Archive » SCOTUS To Decide On What “well regulated militia” Means
November 20th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
1[...] Macsmind : Well, as Charleston Heston said, “When you can rip it from my cold dead hands”. Better yet, as John Lennon said, “You say you want a revolution?” [...]
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI
Leave a reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.