2nd Amendment LIVES!

[futuresoptions]

Yaaaaaaaaay!!!! Wtg Dc!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by livi

Congratulations!!

You Americans may now safely keep on shooting each other! Good ruling!

Marcus,

In Switzerland every male of certain ages is in the countries military. Every one of them has a full automatic weapon at home along with enough ammo to use the weapon if needed.

Why havent they gone crazy shooting themselves? Yes, there have been a few cases of shootings there but not many.

Germany, Holland and so on allow citizens to own and keep weapons at home.

Yes America does have a lot of weapons but we were founded this way and staying free means a lot to us. Our constitution guarantees it and now finally the supreme court realizes that.

Joe

[m21sniper]

From SCOTUS blog:

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/commentary-so-whats-next-on-guns/

The NRA is going to be wery, wery busy.

The single most important thing in today's decision is that SCOTUS stated that the right to firearms ownership applies to everyone- not just people in a milita. It is an individual right...period.

[livi]

Joe,

I know. I was actually just being semi-ironic. Maybe its for the best, but I still think its a sad testimony of the Evolution gone berserk with Homo sapience.

[m21sniper]

Every species has it's own means of self defense. It's just that we opposable thumb types use tools instead of teeth or talons.

[Rick Lee]

I wouldn't be surprised if the DC police decided to get lax on violent crime once folks start getting guns so the mayor will be able to claim a rise in violent crime since the end of the gun ban. Not that such an argument would get the SCOTUS to reverse itself. But it would, in politicians' minds, justfity the most draconian restrictions.

[Danny_Ocean]

Originally Posted by Joeaksa

Sorry but they are not banned!

Please re-read the paragraph I was responding to originally. A few times, if necessary. Had the paragraph indicated "AR-15", we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

As I said before, you can expect Pres. Obama to make the replacement of one or two justices a priority of his administration and to quickly overturn this ruling before it has time to become established precedent.

The control-freaks and NannyState advocates aren't going anywhere - they're only going back to regroup for a while. They absolutely will not stop until all of us are complete and total subservient slaves to Big Brother.

Don't celebrate too hard. It's a perilously thin 5-4 ruling. And if there's one thing I've learned, it's to never, ever, EVER underestimate the destructive power of highly-motivated stupid people in large groups. That's exactly what this ruling is up against.

[m21sniper]

While that is true, the ones set to retire are liberals. The 5 that voted for won't be stepping down for quite a long time, most likely.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

And Obama will be certain to replace them with even more rabid liberals. Best case is status quo for 4 or maybe 8 years. Hardly enough time for this to become ironclad precedent.

[m21sniper]

More liberal than Stevens or Ginsburg? Now that's a terrifying thought. Of course the flip side would be a 7 judge conservative super majority on SCOTUS, a real "law and order" type panel, and i'm sure as hell not thrilled about that idea either.

In reality, i think 5-4 ideological splits are probably for the best. We really have a 4-4 with Kennedy often acting as a swing vote.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

More liberal than Stevens or Ginsburg? Now that's a terrifying thought.

Picture Feinstein or Pelosi on the SCOTUS.

I bet the thought has crossed Obama's mind already.

[rouxroux]

As long as we stock up before 2012, right?

[red-beard]

To me, the dumb part is where they limit the firearms to what is commonly held. Well, some of mthe reason that short barrelled shotguns, True Assault rifles (Full Auto), etc, are not commonly held, is that they have been severly restricted over the past 40-75 years.

The easily transported submachine gun was only available for about 10 years before the insanely high transfer tax stamp was added. In todays money, the stamp would be something like $5000. It was never adjusted for inflation, so it is a bargin. OTOH, since the ability to manufacture new full auto weapons for civilian ownership was banned in 1986, the number of firearms available is "fixed".

The decision was exactly what I thought it would be. Uphold the 2nd, but still allow regulation. The 1st is also regulated, or the 427's wouldn't be important.

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

Picture Feinstein or Pelosi on the SCOTUS.

I bet the thought has crossed Obama's mind already.

Or Bill Clinton....

Or Barack, or his wife, or Chelsea, or Hillary....

Or John Edwards!

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by red-beard

Or Bill Clinton....

Or Barack, or his wife, or Chelsea, or Hillary....

Or John Edwards!

At least with Bill Clinton we know he'd completely ignore all laws and vote however he thought it would make him more popular. So there's a chance he'd do the right thing once in a while, though always for the wrong reasons.

[legion]

Originally Posted by red-beard

To me, the dumb part is where they limit the firearms to what is commonly held. Well, some of mthe reason that short barrelled shotguns, True Assault rifles (Full Auto), etc, are not commonly held, is that they have been severly restricted over the past 40-75 years.

Yep.

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by livi

Congratulations!!

You Americans may now safely keep on shooting each other! Good ruling!

The rest of the world has a distorted view of the USA.

The company that assembles our engines, the owner's son was vacationing in South France last week. Twice, he was talking to locals and they asked him where he was from. He said the United States. They asked: "California?".

"No, Texas."

In both cases, they made pistols with both bands and proceeded to do a double six-gun shoot out. "Pow-pow-pow-pow-pow-pow-pow-pow-pow-pow!"

People THINK we have walk down shoot out in the streets. Even in the old WILD-WEST, we didn't have them. They were mostly made up by Hollywood.

There are a lot of us who are passionate about our rights. We have seen what happens to places like the UK and Australia when guns are banned.

[Jim Richards]

My wife and I spent some time shooting for the first time in many years. We took the NRA basic pistol course in the northern VA 'burbs, and after the classroom session, we were off to the range. (BTW, the course in DC is 4X-5X as expensive as the courses in VA. Hmmm. ) Anyway, we did pretty well for a couple of old farts and managed to keep most of the bullets within hailing distance of the bullseye. LOL! My wife wants us to go to the range a couple of times a month to develop some skill, ingrain good gun safety habits, and try out different guns to help us make a future purchase decision. No argument from me.

Thank goodness for the Heller case and a group of Supremes that actually believe in our Constitution!

[legion]

Dick Heller tried to register his hand gun and was turned down.

Also, DC passed an "emergency" bill that outlaws semi-auto handguns (and blatantly violates both the second Amendment and the recent SCOTUS ruling).