Police Scanner Forum.
March 28, 2024, 11:24:00 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: IF YOU LIKE TO LISTEN TO A POLICE SCANNER CLICK BELOW IT HAS POLICE SHERIFF AND FIRE. ITS FREE
http://www.scanmiamivalley.com/index.php
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Gallery Links Scanner Frequencies Premium Members Donate Countrysideforum Staff List Login Register  

Supreme Court rules in favor of gun ownership rights

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Supreme Court rules in favor of gun ownership rights  (Read 526 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
thejudge
Administrator
Newbie
*****

Cookies 2
Posts: 22


Do unto others as they do unto you


WWW
« on: June 26, 2008, 12:18:29 pm »

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a constitutional right to keep guns in their homes for self-defense, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun control in U.S. history.

 
 The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms restrictions intact.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.

Scalia noted that the handgun is Americans' preferred weapon of self-defense in part because "it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police."

In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."

He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."

Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

Gun rights supporters hailed the decision. "I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.

The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, criticized the ruling. "I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it," she said.

The capital's gun law was among the nation's strictest.

Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his Capitol Hill home a short distance from the Supreme Court.

"I'm thrilled I am now able to defend myself and my household in my home," Heller said shortly after the opinion was announced.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller's favor and struck down Washington's handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.

The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.

White House reaction was restrained. "We're pleased that the Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right of Americans to keep and bear arms," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.

Scalia said nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."

In a concluding paragraph to the his 64-page opinion, Scalia said the justices in the majority "are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and believe the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns."

The law adopted by Washington's city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.

Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.

Forty-four state constitutions contain some form of gun rights, which are not affected by the court's consideration of Washington's restrictions.

The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.
 
 
 
« Last Edit: September 19, 2008, 01:01:12 pm by scanner-admin » Report Spam   Logged

Webmaster and owner of countrysideforum. http://countrysideforum.smfforfree2.com a great place to hang out over 1300 on line.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

scanner-admin
Administrator
Full Member
*****

Cookies 2
Posts: 155



WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 26, 2008, 01:19:36 pm »

I think they did right. As long as citizens can pass a background check, they should be able to carry a weapon anywhere. Here in Chattanooga, citizens ARE allowed to carry weapons in their vehicles, but citizens CANNOT enter park areas with the weapon.
Report Spam   Logged

www.creditcardplussite.com
www.chattanoogafreq.com

Verizon Wireless Support & Chat Forum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://verizonwirelessforum.com

Radio Shack Pro-96

www.creditcardplussite.com
ratz
Guest
« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2008, 07:20:11 am »

Quote
Here in Chattanooga, citizens ARE allowed to carry weapons in their vehicles, but citizens CANNOT enter park areas with the weapon.
I would say that defeats the purpose of even having a permit then. Sometimes I wonder about those making these decisions.
Report Spam   Logged
darthredlight
Global Moderator
Newbie
*****

Cookies 1
Posts: 19



« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2008, 09:10:11 am »

 Wink I dont know about you all but I didnt need no supreme court telling me I have the right to keep my firearms......


I am a firm believer in not licenseing to carry....that give uncle sam directions right to your house....they will know where to go to take those guns.....

If gun control gets any worse those that have gotten license to carry will lose their guns first.....not good idea just to feel important.....dont know how you all feel...
Report Spam   Logged
cloudddae
Newbie
*

Cookies 0
Posts: 3


« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2008, 08:10:30 pm »

Yea! Bout time they did something right.
Report Spam   Logged





Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy