Posted on 09/30/2009 7:12:10 AM PDT by Lurker
“The Supreme Court announced this morning it will hear a challenge to Chicago’s gun restrictions that will determine if local handgun bans are legal.
“Last year, the high court ruled the 2nd Amendment gave individuals the right to possess firearms and struck down Washington, D.C.’s gun bans.”
It’ll be interesting to see how the SCOTUS defends allowing 1 and not the other. (If indeed it rules that way.)
Obama wants to give more power to his Chicago gangster friends. The bad guys will keep their guns/ammo and their victims will have no hope of defending themselves.
"Interesting" is not the word I'd chose, but...
L
Buy them now and store them in a safe place.
From our cold dead hands!
Not so long as the conservatives hold it together. Kennedy has always been the swing vote for the conservatives. O'Connor was the swing vote but she almost always swung to the left, so that really doesn't count.
The crazy thing is that 1A is the only 1 to specifically mention “Congress shall not”.
This is great, a very good thing. This means the conservs want to overturn this and make the bans unlawful before any more of the justices fall to Obama nominees. Lock and load.
Would it be true that because the lower court held for the city, there is more possibility than not that it will be struck down? That if they wanted the status quo to remain, they would have refused to hear the case?
I had forgotten and I am grateful for the reminder. My greater point is, by voting 3rd party we get someone like Obama to appoint someone like Sotomayor.
We can either elect Republican presidents and have a chance to keep the court’s conservative edge or we can protest, vote 3rd party, allow communists in as president and get more people like Ginsburg and Sotomayor.
The answer seems very simple to me.
2A is so crystal clear that it can only be misconstrued by the most twisted of manipulations.
The right SHALL NOT be infringed”. This phrase is so crystal clear, you have to have an agenda opposing it to even begin to make a twisted argument.
“The RIGHT SHALL NOT be infringed.” Who’s right. “The Right of the PEOPLE”.
The 2A could not be made more clear if you spelled out every imaginable contingency. And still, the ONLY twisted logic the socialist gun-banning left can ever get even the slightest foothold on is to make the reference to “a well regulated militia” a convoluted, tortured condition.
The 2A as written is perfect and could not be more clear. In fact, if the Founders had stated “Congress shall make no law...”, Bill Clinton would simply have passed an executive order and said, “I’m not Congress.”
the 2A says what it mean, means what it says, and could not possibly be made more clear. A 5th grader could correctly interpret it, upon learning the meaning of the word “infringed”.
I think this is good news and means they'll probably strike it down.
That if they wanted the status quo to remain, they would have refused to hear the case?
That would have ended things and left the Chicago ban intact.
I agree 100%. If you want to complain about the two party system (ahem Glenn Beck) that's fine, but remember we live in it. No matter how much some people wish to change it, the only thing they do is marginalize their side's influence. Reforming the GOP is an option, a third party is not.
Youll shoot yer eye out kid!
LOL
Do we know what 4 justices agreed to hear the case ?
LOL!
You better watch out. Either someone from SEIU will show up at your door or MSNBC will spot light your harsh speech. (sarc)
Hey Mayor Dumbass Daley, good thing those gun bans were in place when the 4 black teen thugs just beat to death the black teen honors student a few days ago. Otherwise somebody might have ended up getting shot /sarc instead of just being beat senseless by 2x6's and then kicked to death.
I have no hope in this court after they took on the bat lady. May faith in it was pretty low even before that.
Yes, it is a Kel-Tec P3AT. How do you like yours? I just bought the 9mm version this weekend. Sweet!!!
Every year that our Socialist-In-Chief holds the office of POTUS, his appointments on the court will consistently erode the recent advances made in strict construction.
Bet on it!
The longer this wannabe is in office, the more damage that will be done to our founding principles and our culture. Few can imagine just how angry I am at the RNC for running McSham against Chicago's ACORN activist.
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.