Skip to comments.New Battle in the Gun War Heads to the Supreme Court
Posted on 10/05/2009 5:21:42 AM PDT by marktwain
It was an image that shocked the country.
Could a case headed for the Supreme Court overturn gun laws in Chicago?
A 16-year-old honor student in Chicago being beaten to death by teenagers. Derrion Albert, a high school sophomore was caught in a mob fight as he was walking to a bus stop. Despite not being part of either of the gangs, he was punched, kicked and struck by a board.
And just a week and a half after the fatal incident, as residents demand safer streets, Chicago faces a new battle -- this time over guns.
On Monday, the Supreme Court will begin its 2009-2010 term, and on the docket is the case of Chicago residents who are challenging the constitutionality of the city's hand gun laws, which ban residents within the city limits from having guns, even in their own homes.
Otis McDonald, who lives in the same neighborhood where Albert was killed, says his own life has been threatened by local thugs and he says his home has been broken into.
"When I'm at home, I can't even protect myself there. This house here has been broken into at least three times only a week ago," the retired maintenance engineer told ABC News. "It's the times that we live in, and long ago, when the guns were taken away from us in '82, '83, it wasn't so bad back then, but times have changed. ... Everybody is in danger now, in these days."
McDonald says having a handgun in his home would make him feel safer and secure. And he's asking the Supreme Court to let him get that gun, by overturning Chicago's quarter-century ban on handguns.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Outlaw wood. ;)
So why does ABC get armed guards and the person being beaten doesn't have a right to carry a piece?
The SCOTUS needs to take every single one of these cases and state that they have already ruled on the issue. It is up to the US Attorney’s Office to bring suit aginst those cities/states that refuse to comply with the Constitution.
(NOT that I expect any of this to happen in OUR megacorrupt government!)
You know they’ll do and say anything to get their way.
Every single Liberal has lied about the health bill, when the truth has been in it all along.
They say there aren’t any fines? $25,000 says different
Obviously I’m left to wonder how the death of a kid via 2x4 is related to a gun law.
When 2x4’s are outlawed, only outlaws will have 2x4’s?
Or in the words of the immortal Archie Bunker (when his daughter asked about deaths by hand guns), “Would its makes you feel better little girl if they’s were pushed outta winders?”
To be fair, they also relate the story of the besieged McDonald. Never bring a 2x4 to a gun fight.
When people are being beat to death, the strongest or more numerous will always win. As the bad guys always choose the time and place of the attack, that means they will almost always win.
When honest citizens have guns, the fight is equalized. The 90 pound woman is equal to the 300 pound man, even when he also has a gun. When she’s armed and he’s not, she is far more lethal.
Guns are the only defense for the weak and outnumbered, aka the innocent.
Seriously, if someone can’t see that the leftist elitists see themselves as the nobles and we as the serfs,
they need to re-examine the attitudes they’re seeing.
Chicago hasn’t shown what kind of dent, if any, their ban has put in such vexatious things as drive by shootings. Scofflaws at that level will not be deterred by such a trivial thing as a ban.
Glenn Beck said it was a “railroad tie”. Doofus.
(Not sure why that didn’t post on the first try.)
To a point...
Guns require skill and awareness. Otherwise my money is on the 300# guy.
An armed honor student might have been able to survive the attack.
Lol...I was thinking the same thing. Funny thing is, the media was reporting that the kid was hit by a railroad tie. No in way in hell was that a railroad tie, as that is just too heavy...a 2x6, 2x4 most likely.
The media can't differentiate between a piece of lumber, just like they can't really determine what an "assault rifle" really means.
Whenever the SCOTUS takes up an issue of constitutional magnitude I get nervous; every case is a new opportunity to blow another hole in the Bill of Rights. Part of me says we should be glad about Heller and keep the Second Amendment away from this court.
Actually, this was a very positive piece. An excellent quote from Wayne LaPierre from the NRA, and no quotes from anti-gunners. Total emphasis on the role of guns for self-protection.
The real question is why. Well, that’s quite simple. They know they’re going to lose these cases, so they’re jumping ahead of the line, pretending like they’ve been pro-gun all along. The old guard media did the exact same thing a few weeks before the Supreme Court overturned the DC ban. They turned off the incessant drumbeat of anti-gun rhetoric, and started drumming a new beat, namely running articles emphasizing that the preponderance of historical evidence and scholarship supported the Second Amendment as a personal right.
The thing I can’t figure out is how the entire old guard media can turn on a dime as a whole. I can’t imagine there’s really someone that sends out an email telling everyone what to write, so I figure the old guard media must be the biggest bunch of sheep since Bo Peep wielded a staff, probably all taking their cue by everyone simply publishing whatever vomit the AP serves up that day.
I have read Bernie Goldberg and others that claim the NYT, WaPo and LA times set the talking points and the rest just fall in line.
It is easier than actual reporting or thoughtfull editorializing. So that turn on the dime or other lockstep is the norm.
Just wondering...Can you have a shotgun in your house in Chicago? Personally, that’s what I use for home defense. I don’t believe in the hand gun ban at all of course, but I would recommend a nice 12 gauge over a hand gun any day.