2nd Amendment Interpretation-GUN RIGHTS THREADS MERGED HERE - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Firearms General Discussion Rifles, pistols, shotguns, scopes, grips and everything in between.

Advertise Here
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's going to cause SHTF/when/how long will it MERGE THREAD benajah General Discussion 1891 10-12-2018 12:00 PM
Government Shutdown-ALL Threads merged Here Dobbs Political News and Discussion 1182 10-21-2013 04:59 PM
Flooding In Colorado-Threads Merged Here Steps Manmade and Natural Disasters 90 09-28-2013 09:00 PM
NSA and DEA: Has anyone heard of SOD?-All SOD Threads Merged Here KCFirepower Political News and Discussion 71 08-10-2013 08:19 AM
Forming groups threads merged here twyggy Disaster Preparedness General Discussion 210 11-25-2012 03:07 AM

View Poll Results: Do you support gun control
Yes, I favor strong gun control measures 1 0.31%
Yes, I favor some gun control( hi cap mag ban,some types of guns) 0 0%
I favor some laws, storage of guns, background checks 34 10.59%
No new gun control laws,...criminals don't follow laws 105 32.71%
No, gun laws are too restrictive right now. 181 56.39%
Voters: 321. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-26-2008, 10:08 AM
lonewolf lonewolf is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 79
Thanks: 94
Thanked 27 Times in 14 Posts
Talking Supreme court on Gun rights - all threads merged



Advertise Here

The Supreme Court just ruled that everyone has the right to keep and beer arms.I have no other detail anthis time.:D
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to lonewolf For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 10:18 AM
HKTracer HKTracer is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 901
Thanks: 125
Thanked 287 Times in 160 Posts
Default THE D.C. Gun Ban is OFFICIALLY D-U-N......DONE

Well it's about dang time! Score 1 for Gun Owners!!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/...co/scotus_guns

Court rules in favor of Second Amendment gun rights

Quote:
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court says Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

ADVERTISEMENT

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

Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for four colleagues, said the Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home."

In dissent, 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."

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court says Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court's 5-4 ruling strikes down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision goes further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws 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.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to HKTracer For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 10:21 AM
1eaglescout 1eaglescout is offline
Hunter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Georgia, U.S.
Posts: 1,210
Thanks: 373
Thanked 876 Times in 422 Posts
Default

Despite the fact we "won" its still pathetic that 4 justices can't read a simple sentence.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to 1eaglescout For This Useful Post:
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-26-2008, 10:26 AM
kev's Avatar
kev kev is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: East Texas
Age: 51
Posts: 16,187
Thanks: 3,046
Thanked 39,276 Times in 7,847 Posts
Default

Here are some links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7474924.stm

Quote:
A ban on handguns in Washington DC has been ruled unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court.

In a 5-4 decision, the justices upheld a lower court ruling striking down the ban. The justices said individuals had a right to own guns for personal use.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/...co/scotus_guns

Quote:
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights 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 laws 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."
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to kev For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 10:34 AM
Maurepas's Avatar
Maurepas Maurepas is offline
trois pour cent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,942
Thanks: 2,014
Thanked 5,645 Times in 2,305 Posts
Default

Wow. Another 5-4 vote. Should never have been that close.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Maurepas For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 10:36 AM
gunguy's Avatar
gunguy gunguy is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Puget Sound area
Posts: 172
Thanks: 235
Thanked 232 Times in 81 Posts
Default

We won thats all that matters. It is sad to see the justices so split. What you said, learn how to read justices. This will change things drastically; for instance trigger locks will be banned, & Chicago & New York will have to change drastically or face huge lawsuits. Yes it's one for the good guys. There may be some hope for this country yet. I haven't felt like partying for a while but this weekend its time to celebrate.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gunguy For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 11:10 AM
jkca1 jkca1 is offline
Lone Wolf
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 157
Thanks: 118
Thanked 51 Times in 34 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lonewolf View Post
The Supreme Court just ruled that everyone has the right to keep and beer arms.I have no other detail anthis time.:D
Hey, where do I get those beer arms? Are they anything like beer kegs?
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to jkca1 For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 11:10 AM
spaz218's Avatar
spaz218 spaz218 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: VA
Age: 38
Posts: 140
Thanks: 18
Thanked 33 Times in 15 Posts
Default High court strikes down gun ban

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/26/scotus.guns/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a sweeping ban on handguns in the nation's capital violated the Second Amendment right to bear arms.


A gun ownership supporter holds a placard in March outside the Supreme Court in Washington.

The justices voted 5-4 against the ban, with Justice Antonin Scalia writing the opinion for the majority.

At issue in District of Columbia v. Heller was whether Washington's ban violated the right to "keep and bear arms" by preventing individuals -- as opposed to state militias -- from having guns in their homes.

"Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security and where gun violence is a serious problem," Scalia wrote. "That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct."

Scalia was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, who are all considered conservative voices on the court. Justice Anthony Kennedy, often seen as a swing vote, also joined the majority.

District of Columbia officials argued they had the responsibility to impose "reasonable" weapons restrictions to reduce violent crime, but several Washingtonians challenged the 32-year-old law. Some said they had been constant victims of crimes and needed guns for protection. See how proponents, opponents argued

In March 2007, a federal appeals court overturned the ban, which keeps most private citizens from owning handguns and keeping them in their homes.

Don't Miss
Child rapists can't be executed, court rules
Court rules in favor of Muslim at Gitmo
High court to decide whether Navy saving whales
Gun laws in high court's sights
It was the first time a federal appeals court ruled a gun law unconstitutional on Second Amendment grounds. iReport.com: What's your reaction to the ruling?

City attorneys urged the high court to intervene, warning, "The District of Columbia -- a densely populated urban locality where the violence caused by handguns is well-documented -- will be unable to enforce a law that its elected officials have sensibly concluded saves lives."

There were 143 gun-related murders in Washington last year, compared with 135 in 1976, when the handgun ban was enacted.

The Second Amendment says, "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 wording repeatedly has raised the question of whether gun ownership is an individual right, or a collective one pertaining to state militias and therefore subject to regulation.

In an Opinion Research Corp. poll of 1,035 adult Americans this month, 67 percent of those surveyed said they felt the Second Amendment gave individuals the right to own guns. Thirty percent said it provided citizens the right to form a militia. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. See poll results

The Supreme Court has avoided the question since the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. The high court last examined the issue in 1939 but stayed away from the broad constitutional question.

Only Chicago, Illinois, has a handgun ban as sweeping as Washington's, though Maryland, Massachusetts and San Francisco, California, joined the Windy City in issuing briefs supporting the district's ban.

The National Rifle Association, Disabled Veterans for Self-Defense and the transgender group Pink Pistols -- along with 31 states -- filed briefs supporting the District of Columbia's gun owners.

In February, a majority of U.S. congressmen -- 55 senators and 250 representatives -- filed a brief urging the Supreme Court to strike down Washington's ordinance.


"Our founders didn't intend for the laws to be applied to some folks and not to others," Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, said at the time.

Washington's ban applies only to handguns. The city allows possession of rifles and shotguns, although it requires that they be kept in the home, unloaded and fitted with locks or dissembled.

Wohoo!
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to spaz218 For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 11:14 AM
mr2blue mr2blue is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 28
Thanks: 4
Thanked 21 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Now the anti-gun nuts will create a frenzy about how the crime rate will skyrocket and how the court created a more dangerous America. The Vitriol begins.

I thank god that the ruling came down now. If Obama wins the court will swing more toward socialism and our historic rights as stong citizens will be challenged. The left wants a nanny state with the Government providing service womb to tomb which IMO is completely opposite our heritage. We used to be the CAN DO country but we are becoming the who is going help me country. We have a nation full of victims.

If it all goes the way the left wants we won't be electing Senators and Presidents we will be electing sheep herders.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to mr2blue For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 11:14 AM
ontheroad's Avatar
ontheroad ontheroad is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 81
Thanks: 81
Thanked 73 Times in 29 Posts
Default

Supreme Court says Americans have right to guns By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
6 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

ADVERTISEMENT

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 laws 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.

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.

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

**** Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.

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 **** 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.

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.

Amen
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ontheroad For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 11:16 AM
Mad Dog's Avatar
Mad Dog Mad Dog is offline
The Punisher
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 1,607
Thanks: 1,290
Thanked 2,001 Times in 829 Posts
Default

Wow, 4 threads on the same subject at the same time. Maybe one of the moderators can consolidate the threads.:D
Quick reply to this message
Old 06-26-2008, 11:18 AM
spaz218's Avatar
spaz218 spaz218 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: VA
Age: 38
Posts: 140
Thanks: 18
Thanked 33 Times in 15 Posts
Default

LOL...I want to see Obama's reaction to this...He,he,he
"Take That!"
Quick reply to this message
Old 06-26-2008, 11:23 AM
Kaleb Kaleb is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 342
Thanks: 49
Thanked 235 Times in 133 Posts
Default

It will only delay the liberals for a while. Thankfully in that delay, we can cache, cache, cache!!!!
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Kaleb For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 11:38 AM
shawn shawn is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,226
Thanks: 2,898
Thanked 1,883 Times in 858 Posts
Default

Gun owners 1
Government 0
I think it about time for the Million Gun March!
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to shawn For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 11:46 AM
411man 411man is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,054
Thanks: 1,404
Thanked 2,669 Times in 789 Posts
Awards Showcase
Outstanding Member Outstanding Post Outstanding Thread 
Total Awards: 3
Default

Before you shout for glory:

Anyone notice the limitations on purpose ( self defense, hunting, etc. ) NOT Defense against an oppressive government; or the limits on Type of weapons ????

OH, let's not forget the " REGULATION " exception !!!!

Obama will be elected and the Democrates WILL pick-up more seats in both the House & Senate. So what are our chances of keeping our RTKBA with that ?

Zip, Zero, Nada !!!!
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 411man For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 11:49 AM
bigdog02's Avatar
bigdog02 bigdog02 is offline
7.62x39
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Central PA
Posts: 239
Thanks: 54
Thanked 112 Times in 61 Posts
Default

I was happy with the ruling but sad to see the 5-4 decision. It helps cast doubt.

Either way with the ruling in place in favor of gun owners, even if Obama would get in and swing the house and senate - the hurdle of the supreme court decision would still be there.
Quick reply to this message
Old 06-26-2008, 11:57 AM
Kalashnikov Kalashnikov is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 414
Thanks: 213
Thanked 196 Times in 123 Posts
Default

This establishes our RIGHT and now any restrictions should be challenged as an infringement. Every new "gun law" should be challenged vigorously from this point on. The next step IMO is we need to take the restrictions on class 2 guns to court and get the registry reopened.
Quick reply to this message
Old 06-26-2008, 11:59 AM
kenxkillz kenxkillz is offline
In a pile of brass
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Best place on earth
Age: 26
Posts: 3,776
Thanks: 1,796
Thanked 1,649 Times in 863 Posts
Default

it was only 5-4...only 5 supreme justices beleive in the 2nd amendment...amazing. back in the 40's or 50's even up to the 70 it probably would have been like 8-1. its just amazing how many people are scared of guns or dont want us to have them. and whenever a senator/represenatives family member is shot they go on a anti gun crusade in congress with gun bans and restrictions. dont punish us because your family member was either unlucky or stupid.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to kenxkillz For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 12:00 PM
VW.'s Avatar
VW. VW. is offline
Curious Cat
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ocean Park, Washington State
Posts: 415
Thanks: 862
Thanked 431 Times in 173 Posts
Default

Let’s celebrate!
VW

Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to VW. For This Useful Post:
Old 06-26-2008, 12:04 PM
kenxkillz kenxkillz is offline
In a pile of brass
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Best place on earth
Age: 26
Posts: 3,776
Thanks: 1,796
Thanked 1,649 Times in 863 Posts
Default

doesnt anyone remember that hitler disarmed the jews and people of germany years before WWII and the gathering of jews? he took all their guns away gradually, first hi-cap mags, then semi automatic then eventually handguns. he did all that so they couldnt fight back, so why does the american government want to make us helpless? i dont think they want to gather up jews or anything but why are they trying to do this?
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to kenxkillz For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
2nd admendment, gun argumants, gun ban, gun control, gun rights, obama, sandy hook, school shootings



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net