2nd. Amendment

Poorboy · Jun 28, 2010

Today the United States Supreme Court Ratified the 2nd. Amendment! They voted in Favor in a Case from McDonald vs Chicago. That Oughta P**s off Obumma and his Gang of Criminals

chefdennis · Jun 28, 2010

While it is a good 1st move....they did NOT over turn Chicago's law, they simply said that 2A is imposed on the states and cities a well as the Fed Gov..chicago's law still stands as it is until the lower appeals court RE-hears its case...

Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall.

While it probably will be overturned, Chicago will put a "registration" in place which is another infringement...but the SC left that door open...

greg334 · Jun 28, 2010

I may be a bit wrong but with Roberts, they have heard two cases that have to do with gun control and it seems to me they will hear more in the future.

This seems to be a good change to the court.

chefdennis · Jun 28, 2010

Heller vs DC was the 1st in a while. When that was ruled in 2A's favor, the The 2A Foundation and a few others along with Mc donald filed suit against Chicago's Gun Ban...it lost along the way setting it up for todays SC ruling...

And yes there will be more lawsuits , as Mayor Daley has already said they will ignore the ruling until force and then possibly start a gun registration if forced to allow guns in the city....the SC left that door open by saying cities can have a "reasonable right to regulate"......but i think a registration will also be challenged.....

greg334 · Jun 28, 2010

Well one thing that has popped up a bit is Roberts and others are not going to jam the anti-gun crowd with the rulings but to whittle away to some of the more restrictive regulations and then define it as a solid right, which seems to be the start with today's decision.

chefdennis · Jun 28, 2010

You know , while this is a minor victory for 2A at this point...it really isn't a good thing for the Constitution in the big picture....by the SC deciding what powers the states have,,,they have just sucked the power of the states for the Constitution...no long does the constitution carry te weight of "if it isn't in the constitution, it belongs to the states to handle...this is in the same vane as Rowe vs Wade...a invasion into state powers by the fed.....

OntarioVanMan · Jun 28, 2010

chefdennis said:
You know , while this is a minor victory for 2A at this point...it really isn't a good thing for the Constitution in the big picture....by the SC deciding what powers the states have,,,they have just sucked the power of the states for the Constitution...no long does the constitution carry te weight of "if it isn't in the constitution, it belongs to the states to handle...this is in the same vane as Rowe vs Wade...a invasion into state powers by the fed.....

It is not and has never been a perfect system...but who else can make the decision? It can't be an individual state can it?

Isn't the SC impartial from the Feds? Or at least supposed to be is it not?

greg334 · Jun 28, 2010

Well I would agree but the issue is the right of the individual vs. the right of the state. The state loses and should with the fundamentals of our rights.

The states were given the tenth, which spells it out plainly. In the case of a 2nd amendment issue, the state's right to regulate it as the state regulating the 1st simply doesn't exist. I think this is where the SC is going, the states have some limitations while the individual doesn't.

Roe vs. Wade is an interesting thing because that's about privacy, not abortion and it seems that the new health care laws kind of steps on Roe vs. Wade a lot.