Posted on 06/04/2009 11:46:59 AM PDT by WhiteCastle
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. appeals court in Chicago upheld the strict gun-control ordinances in Chicago and suburban Oak Park on Tuesday, setting the stage for a Supreme Court battle over whether the 2nd Amendment and its protection for gun owners extends to state and municipal laws.
In a 3-0 decision, the 7th Circuit judges said they were bound by legal precedents that held the 2nd Amendment applies only to federal laws.The latest ruling also may undercut a criticism leveled at Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court. In January, she joined a three-judge ruling in New York that came to the same conclusion. Last week, gun rights advocates cited that decision and called her an "anti-gun radical."
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagobreakingnews.com ...
I'm a life member. Not that gives me any more or less right to criticize the NRA, but I lay that out FWIW.
The NRA SUCKS at teaching the public about 2nd amendment law. It accepts Circuit precedent as correct, and argues following "conventional wisdom" that accepts the errors Circuit Courts have made in reading and applying Miller and Presser.
The Miller case stands for the proposition that the feds may not prohibit short barrel shotguns, if short barrel shotguns have a defensive use. So, 2008, Heller comes along and the NRA says "Miller stands for the proposition that the feds MAY prohibit the public from short barrel shotguns." They argue that this fabrication is necessary to get the LYING Court to throw the bone of allowing citizens to have a handgun at home, provided they jump through whatever licensing hoops the locals erect. "We Won!" Yeah, ROTFL, you sure did.
The NRA is as much guilty for walking back the power of the people as the 2nd and 7th Circuit. Even if they have to argue BS to the Courts, they could STILL educate the people about how big a liar the Courts are being in regard to the Presser and Miller cases. Not a peep - they say the Heller Court "got it perfectly right."
They aren't fooling me. I read the cases.
Agree, but I suspect this is what the law clerks writing the opinions look at.
Good comments you made. I think some people have guns, but want gun control so others can not have a gun. Remember Rosie O'Donnel's body guard geting caught with a gun at the day care center.
Thanks for the links.
I don't like it much either. But I don't see how to avoid it.
Would you please comment on the language of the 2nd amendment? On its face with the passive voice and no specified agent it seems to me not necessarily to pertain only to the Feds.
The clerks don't sign the opinions.
SCALIA : We therefore read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns.
District of Columbia v. Heller
US V. Miller : the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear [a weapon that] is any part of the ordinary military equipment or [which] use could contribute to the common defense
NRA: We Won! We Won! We Won!
I'll add that the people can demand Justices be impeached, but the clerks are beyond our reach.
It's repetitive or reiterative of a power the people said they would fight to retain, using force if necessary.
Over time, the people have been conditioned to see their rights as coming from the government. The tables are turned. Suck it up. Shut up and get back to work. Etc.
The Presser Court got it right. The RKBA doesn't depend on the 2nd amendment, and the states aren't free to prohibit keep and bear arms - if the states do, the people are justified in mounting an armed rebellion, if petition for redress proves ineffective.
Very good.
"SCALIA : We therefore read Miller to say ...."
Good point. Miller was also "In the absence of any evidence ... " because there were no defendents or defense lawyers at the trial (as I understand it).
"NRA: We Won! We Won! We Won! "
Very approriate. I sometimes wonder why the NRA seems to hold back about pushing for gun rights. They seem to be doing a good bit in the states now.
Maybe there needs to be more disclosure about the clerks -- where they went to school and where they go to work after leaving the clerking job.
"Follow the money" is always a safe bet.
They claim the rights were lost incrementally, so need to regained the same way. What they really mean is that even though the people had the right to machine guns before, they shouldn't have the right to them any more. I.e., the feds are right to hem in the RKBA.
That's the excuse, and the real reasons (besides fund raising) for not exposing blatant bogus jurisprudence to their membership.
In the end, I think it doesn't make any difference. The public is, for the most part, a bunch of lazy, ignorant (I mean that in an endearing way), dependent, irresponsible (not my fault), and risk averse individuals. Even if the NRA told the public what a bunch of lying cheats and enablers the Courts have been, the people wouldn't act on the information.
That was in the back of my mind a little. Saw somewhere recently that Wayne LaPierre makes close to $1 million per year. That is a little much, if true.
I agree, the public for the most part doesn't care, but I have been surprised by the number of women here in North Georgia that have guns -- and carry them. And there is more discussion lately about guns and the need to have them.
I don't think that's an outrageous amount. My beef is that they are baby-stepping the public on the core power-dynamic between the governed and the politician, and they are helping the Courts bury the Courts own lies.
-- I agree, the public for the most part doesn't care, but I have been surprised by the number of women here in North Georgia that have guns -- and carry them. --
I think the public sort of cares, and I agree that guns for personal protection are a hot item. See too, AR-15's flying off the shelves. I'm confident that the people of Illinois are just as interested in keep and bear as your neighbors in North Georgia, but those folks don't care so much that they are storming the castle.
The gun grabbing powers are patient. This sort of paradigm shift takes a generation or three to complete. RKBA will soon be right to a gun at home, if the gun is on the approved list and you have a license. CCW at states discretion.
Interesting way of putting it -- had not thought about it in that sense, though I knew they often should have pushed the issue more.
May be worthwhile to bring up this point more often, to remind us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.