Subscribe to Outdoor Life
Get 1 Year for Only $10
The Gun Shots Recent Posts
Categories
Recent Comments
Archives
The Gun Shots |
June 28, 2010
Supreme Court Win! Handgun Ban Struck Down - 9
by John Haughey
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment "applies equally to the federal government and the states." The 5-4 ruling in McDonald v city of Chicago did not explicitly strike down gun bans in Chicago and one of its suburbs, but orders a federal appeals court to reconsider its initial ruling upholding the bans. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall, a vast majority of legal pundits agree. The ruling states conclusively that the 14th Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment, meaning local and state governments cannot pick and choose which fundamental Constitutional rights it can ignore or uphold. “Today’s ruling is a victory for freedom and liberty,” said National Shooting Sports Foundation President Stephen L. Sanetti. “All law-abiding Americans, no matter whether they live in a big city like Chicago or in rural Wyoming, have the same Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Constitutional rights don’t stop at state or city borders. Cities like Chicago and New York and states like California must now respect the Second Amendment.” That's the good news. There is a potential for bad news ... if what appears to be good news now, in the immediate aftermath of the decision's release Monday, does not materialize as hoped. Two issues of concern remain. In authoring the majority opinion, Justice Samuel Alito suggested that some limitations on the Second Amendment could survive legal challenges. The Second Amendment is fully binding on states and cities and "limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values," he wrote. If this ambigious loophole can be exploited by anti-gunners, their legal strategy will be revealed when the Seventh Circuit Court again reviews McDonald v. Chicago, as it was remanded to do by Monday's decision. Alito, writing for all five majority justices, said "the right to keep and bear arms must be regarded as a substantive guarantee, not a prohibition that could be ignored so long as the states legislated in an evenhanded manner." The ruling builds upon the Court's 2008 decision in D.C. v. Heller that invalidated the handgun ban in the nation's capital. That decision held that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms was a right the Founders specifically delegated to individuals. Gun rights proponents almost immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Ill, where handguns have been banned for nearly 30 years. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says those laws appear to be the last two remaining outright bans. Lower federal courts upheld the two laws, noting that judges on those benches were bound by Supreme Court precedent and that it would be up to the high court justices to ultimately rule on the true reach of the Second Amendment. In Monday's ruling, four of the majority justices concluded that the 2d Amendment is incorporated through the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause. However, Justice Clarence said wrote that the amendment is incorporated through the 14th Amendment Privileges or Immunities Clause. The ramifications of the ruling will play out in the weeks and months to come. Here is a roundup of immediate reactions and analysis of the ruling: *Firearms Industry Hails Victory in Supreme Court Second Amendment Case; *Supreme Court of the United States delivered their opinion on McDonald v. City of Chicago *High Court’s Big Ruling For Gun Rights; *Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide;
|
Outdoorlife.com is part of the Field & Stream Network, a division of Bonnier Corporation.
Copyright © 2012 Bonnier Corp. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Comments (9)
Not over yet Sports Fans!
We have a Treaty out their Clinton signed that hasn't been ratified yet!!
And while we all look at Chicago, Massachusetts is about to pass more restrictive gun laws. Our Gov. wants to allow only one gun a month. Along with other anti-gun laws in this state, our rights are slowly being eroded. Soon we won't be any better off than Chicago.
While we celebrate this decision, Chicago is hard at work to put up new roadblocks to gun ownership in Chicago. I've not confirmed it yet but I did hear that they are considering banning gun shops in the city. Keep this one in your sights.
Gents, this is a good step indeed, setting precedents that will bolster Second Amendment rights.
This is a great day for the People of the U.S.A., not just gun owners.
This is a major victory. This should make it clear that an outright ban by any local government is unconstitutional. I haven't read the entire opinion yet, but I'm a little concerned about the loophole--it will invite creative obstructions to our Second Amendment rights. I'm also puzzled by the majority's inability to agree which clause guarantees that the Second Amendment applies to the states and local government. The way I read Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, the due process clause, the privileges and immunities clause, AND ALSO THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE, all support the conclusion that the entire Constitution of the United States, from "We the people..." to the 27th Amendment, applies to the entire United States, including all states and their subdivisions. I guess I shouldn't be too critical--at least they got the answer right.
Nice timing--as I was writing this I noticed that the wind is blowing just right for me to get a good view of the American Flag flying in front of the Boys & Girls Club about 1/2 mile away--can't really see it when the wind is slack & it's behind the trees when the wind blows the other way. I don't really believe in omens or karma or any of that, but seeing the flag flying proudly as I write about our Constitutional rights touched that soft patriotic part of me. God bless America!
chalk one up for our side.
Good news indeed.
But another 5-4 vote!? Meaning only a margin of 1 vote for upholding the constitution.
Given the type of replacement judges we are likely to get in the next couple of years it is clear our freedom is hanging by a thread. Let us all try to make that a stronger thread this Nov.
later,
charlie
This is a huge step in further protection of our gun rights. As I posted in the forum section, the libs are already talking about how many people will die as a result of this ruling. Funny how they never talk about how many people have died as a direct result of gun control, especially in places like D.C., NYC, Chicago, Detroit, San Francisco, L.A., you know, all of the places with gun control and out of control crime because the citizens are hostages of the libs in charge.
All Americans who believe that we are citizens and not subjects have reason to rejoice in this ruling. It is a great day for the rights of gun owners.
:-D
Post a Comment (200 characters or less)
And while we all look at Chicago, Massachusetts is about to pass more restrictive gun laws. Our Gov. wants to allow only one gun a month. Along with other anti-gun laws in this state, our rights are slowly being eroded. Soon we won't be any better off than Chicago.
This is a huge step in further protection of our gun rights. As I posted in the forum section, the libs are already talking about how many people will die as a result of this ruling. Funny how they never talk about how many people have died as a direct result of gun control, especially in places like D.C., NYC, Chicago, Detroit, San Francisco, L.A., you know, all of the places with gun control and out of control crime because the citizens are hostages of the libs in charge.
All Americans who believe that we are citizens and not subjects have reason to rejoice in this ruling. It is a great day for the rights of gun owners.
:-D
Good news indeed.
But another 5-4 vote!? Meaning only a margin of 1 vote for upholding the constitution.
Given the type of replacement judges we are likely to get in the next couple of years it is clear our freedom is hanging by a thread. Let us all try to make that a stronger thread this Nov.
later,
charlie
chalk one up for our side.
This is a major victory. This should make it clear that an outright ban by any local government is unconstitutional. I haven't read the entire opinion yet, but I'm a little concerned about the loophole--it will invite creative obstructions to our Second Amendment rights. I'm also puzzled by the majority's inability to agree which clause guarantees that the Second Amendment applies to the states and local government. The way I read Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, the due process clause, the privileges and immunities clause, AND ALSO THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE, all support the conclusion that the entire Constitution of the United States, from "We the people..." to the 27th Amendment, applies to the entire United States, including all states and their subdivisions. I guess I shouldn't be too critical--at least they got the answer right.
Nice timing--as I was writing this I noticed that the wind is blowing just right for me to get a good view of the American Flag flying in front of the Boys & Girls Club about 1/2 mile away--can't really see it when the wind is slack & it's behind the trees when the wind blows the other way. I don't really believe in omens or karma or any of that, but seeing the flag flying proudly as I write about our Constitutional rights touched that soft patriotic part of me. God bless America!
This is a great day for the People of the U.S.A., not just gun owners.
Gents, this is a good step indeed, setting precedents that will bolster Second Amendment rights.
While we celebrate this decision, Chicago is hard at work to put up new roadblocks to gun ownership in Chicago. I've not confirmed it yet but I did hear that they are considering banning gun shops in the city. Keep this one in your sights.
Not over yet Sports Fans!
We have a Treaty out their Clinton signed that hasn't been ratified yet!!
Post a Comment (200 characters or less)