Replies

For anyone that has not seen this breaking news. The DC circuit court of appeals has just ruled that the DC ban on handgun ownership is unconstitutional and they directly ruled that the 2nd amendment applies to an individuals right to bear arms and not only to militias. This is a huge ruling. Possibly a massive turning point in the handling of the second amendment. It could expose a large number of gun laws to being overturned on these grounds.

A Washington DC court did this? I'm stuned!

This ruling will be appealed, and bounced to the Supremes. Wowza, whatta case that'll be!

Bang, bang!
He shot me down!
Bang, bang!
I hit the ground!
Bang, bang!
That awful sound!
Bang, bang!
My baby shot me down ...!

For anyone that has not seen this breaking news. The DC circuit court of appeals has just ruled that the DC ban on handgun ownership is unconstitutional and they directly ruled that the 2nd amendment applies to an individuals right to bear arms and not only to militias. This is a huge ruling. Possibly a massive turning point in the handling of the second amendment. It could expose a large number of gun laws to being overturned on these grounds.

Sorry, but I hate to burst your bubble. After seeing liberal courts invoke "compelling government interest", "evolving international sentiment", treaties, and just plain old supreme power, this is at most a speed bump. I doubt if it will even generate any new talking points so the state's mouthpieces like the NY Slimes and Washington comPost can spread the word.

After watching the First and Fourth amendments trashed, courts assume control of intelligence gathering, and congress trying to appoint itself as political commissars to the military, I'll reserve judgment on the significance of a "contested" appeals court decision.

I have to admit, the leftist judge who dissented basically established the rule that DC residents have less rights than Gitmo terrorist prisoners. Since they are not a state, DC has only those rights that someone wants to give them, according to her. I guess the Bill of Rights didn't apply to US states before they were admitted to the Union, either.

Of course, I know a liberal who lives in NYC who says that "everyone there" realizes that they live under an abridged Bill of Rights, because "everyone" knows you can't have the same freedom of speech, property, and possession of firearms as everyone else, and it's all just "common sense" because of the population density.