Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Battle in the Gun War Heads to the Supreme Court
ABCnews ^ | 4 October, 2009 | DAVID KERLEY, DENNIS POWELL and HUMA KHAN

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 ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; chicago; constitution; heller; mcdonald; shallnotbeinfringed
ABC manages to insert the idea that gun bans are somehow related to preventing crime.
1 posted on 10/05/2009 5:21:43 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Outlaw wood. ;)


2 posted on 10/05/2009 5:29:30 AM PDT by fulltlt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
You go to ABC's main studios and walk in and start beating on people the building management is going send their armed guards to deal with the situation. They won't wait for the cops.

So why does ABC get armed guards and the person being beaten doesn't have a right to carry a piece?

3 posted on 10/05/2009 5:32:09 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

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!)


4 posted on 10/05/2009 5:35:20 AM PDT by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

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


5 posted on 10/05/2009 5:37:37 AM PDT by wastedyears (The best aid we could ever give Africa would be thousands of rifles to throw out their own dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
You go to ABC's main studios and walk in and start beating on people the building management is going send their armed guards to deal with the situation. They won't wait for the cops.

So why does ABC get armed guards and the person being beaten doesn't have a right to carry a piece?


Because all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
6 posted on 10/05/2009 5:41:04 AM PDT by snowrip (Liberal? YOU ARE A SOCIALIST WITH NO RATIONAL ARGUMENT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

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?”


7 posted on 10/05/2009 5:45:15 AM PDT by TWohlford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

To be fair, they also relate the story of the besieged McDonald. Never bring a 2x4 to a gun fight.


8 posted on 10/05/2009 5:46:10 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (The Democrat party is a criminal enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

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.


9 posted on 10/05/2009 5:46:35 AM PDT by SampleMan (No one should die on a gov. waiting list., or go broke because the gov. has dictated their salary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snowrip

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.


10 posted on 10/05/2009 5:47:24 AM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, save Bowman for later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

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.


11 posted on 10/05/2009 5:48:41 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (The Democrat party is a criminal enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fulltlt
"struck by a board"
12 posted on 10/05/2009 5:55:09 AM PDT by Past Your Eyes (You don't have to be ignorant to be a Democrat...but if you are...so what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Past Your Eyes

Glenn Beck said it was a “railroad tie”. Doofus.
(Not sure why that didn’t post on the first try.)


13 posted on 10/05/2009 5:57:14 AM PDT by Past Your Eyes (You don't have to be ignorant to be a Democrat...but if you are...so what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
When she’s armed and he’s not, she is far more lethal.

To a point...

Guns require skill and awareness. Otherwise my money is on the 300# guy.

14 posted on 10/05/2009 6:12:12 AM PDT by NY.SS-Bar9 (Tree of Liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

An armed honor student might have been able to survive the attack.


15 posted on 10/05/2009 6:15:25 AM PDT by JimRed ("Hey, hey, Teddy K., hot enough down there today?" TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fulltlt
Outlaw wood. ;)

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.

16 posted on 10/05/2009 6:39:27 AM PDT by voicereason (I Don't Need SEX...I Get Screwed By Democrats Everyday!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

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.


17 posted on 10/05/2009 6:46:48 AM PDT by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

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.


18 posted on 10/05/2009 6:48:26 AM PDT by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Made from The Right Stuff)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: catnipman

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.


19 posted on 10/05/2009 6:53:06 AM PDT by KC Burke (...but He has made the trains run on time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

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.


20 posted on 10/05/2009 7:00:10 AM PDT by strider44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

16 year olds are not allowed to own handguns anywhere as far as I know. Of course many do anyhow..


21 posted on 10/05/2009 8:48:50 AM PDT by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Past Your Eyes
Glenn Beck said it was a “railroad tie”. Doofus.

I've heard the boards referred to as "railroad ties" by more than just a few media outlets... If THAT were true, the thugs would fall under the "Mongo" rule... "Don't shoot him, you'll only make him mad."

Mark

22 posted on 10/05/2009 9:39:53 AM PDT by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TWohlford
*** 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? ***

It's this: Crime and Gangs in Chicago is out of control. And thanks to Daley the good citizen is defenseless.(1) Add to that, a couple-few weeks back the Supt of the CPD said there are 100,000 Gang Members in Chicago. (Baghdad is safer)

I listen to the CPD Calls on a scanner. You can't believe the Home Burglaries that occur in broad daylight. In the middle of the afternoon on a weekend. Its like they wait for the person to go shopping. But if there's someone else still in that house, its now a Home Invasion and that person is up the creek.

(1) Long guns are legal but they registration process is so onerous that even an Alderman screwed up and he asked for a Registration Mulligan.

23 posted on 10/05/2009 11:45:19 AM PDT by Condor51 (The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Spok
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.
Understandable - but how do you vindicate rights that you dare not assert in court? The plaintiff is an actual person who has a concrete issue. What else can he do?

24 posted on 10/05/2009 12:59:24 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (SPENDING without representation is tyranny. To represent us you have to READ THE BILLS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NY.SS-Bar9
To a point... Guns require skill and awareness. Otherwise my money is on the 300# guy.

So do hands. If she knows how to point and pull the trigger, she is already more lethal. One doesn't need to be a Navy SEAL to use a firearm to deadly effect.

The bottom line is that without the gun, she has little to no chance whatsoever. Five minutes of indoc on a simple firearm, and she has the upper hand on an unarmed monster.

25 posted on 10/05/2009 1:41:54 PM PDT by SampleMan (No one should die on a gov. waiting list., or go broke because the gov. has dictated their salary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion

Knowing the right time to take up a case with the right facts is the true genius of appellate practice. Every opportunity the court gets to affirm or expand the Heller decision also presents an opportunity to limit or totally emasculate it, then we all lose. Will Rogers noted that the US Supreme Court decisions ‘follow the headlines’, and that was a long time ago. The court can follow precedent, or ignore it. The integrity of our legal system is no better than the integrity of those we pay to wear the black robes, and that’s what scares me.


26 posted on 10/05/2009 2:03:27 PM PDT by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
Five minutes of indoc on a simple firearm, and she has the upper hand on an unarmed monster.

If you seriously believe that five minutes is all it takes to be proficient with a firearm in a stressful situation, you obviously know nothing about personal protection. Successfully deploying a firearm in self defense requires acute situational awareness, and a reflexive muscle memory.

In the time it takes Ms. :05 to realize she is in danger, she has 300# on top of her. Even if she sees it coming, one hesitation, one fumble, and she is worse off than before.

It ain't the movies.

27 posted on 10/05/2009 3:49:48 PM PDT by NY.SS-Bar9 (Tree of Liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: NY.SS-Bar9
I've used a firearm in self-defense three times. Take your little soap box somewhere else. I'm not impressed with mall commandos.

It takes very little knowledge of firearms to shoot one. What it takes is the will to pull the trigger. Very, very few criminals have any real firearms training, yet they manage to kill people all the time. Is more skill better, obviously, but you greatly exagerate it as a requirement. Will, not skill, is the big decider in most self-defense situations.

Any armed cop can be shot if there is no warning, tons of training won't change that. So its no surprise that the same holds for everyone else.

Yea, I can take any woman off the street, give her five minutes of instruction with a shotgun and if she has the will to pull the trigger and enough warning to raise the gun, she will kill you before you can touch her. You sound like some SWAT wannabe.

28 posted on 10/05/2009 4:08:43 PM PDT by SampleMan (No one should die on a gov. waiting list., or go broke because the gov. has dictated their salary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

It would be nice if you could leave the personal attacks out. They are the last resort of those who know they have a weak argument. You sound angry. Perhaps your quick emotional response is the reason why you have had to use a firearm three times.

You present two very different scenarios. Using a shotgun in a home defense situation is dramatically different from self defense outside the home. I am a proponent of having people arm themselves, but not everyone has the knowledge, skills and attitude required.

Peace.


29 posted on 10/05/2009 4:33:50 PM PDT by NY.SS-Bar9 (DVC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NY.SS-Bar9
I'm generally quick to reject illogical arguments.

I am a proponent of having people arm themselves, but not everyone has the knowledge, skills and attitude required.

You come off as very elitist in your thinking. Using a firearm is not rocket science, and being highly skilled is not required to be lethal. Certainly not required to be better off than bringing a 90 pound body to a fist or bat fight.

Attitude is king, not quick draw, or the ability to shoot a 2" group at 50 feet. Calm and deliberate is vital. Of course more training is better, but very little training can make a person a whole lot safer.

FYI, the first time I used a gun I was a teenager and saw a beating coming on when I asked a group of men to get off of our farm. They walked back for their guns.

The second and third was when I flipped houses in a bad part of town and had pairs of people walk in on me expecting an easy mark. As I'd never met any of the individuals I much doubt that my lack of cordiality played any part.

None of the above should be read to say that training isn't good, it is, and more is better.

30 posted on 10/05/2009 5:43:13 PM PDT by SampleMan (No one should die on a gov. waiting list., or go broke because the gov. has dictated their salary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
You come off as very elitist in your thinking.

I have just seen too many people that think they can use a firearm - add a little pressure and the results are almost comical.

I teach people that if they are shooting, they probably haven't done too good a job being aware and avoiding trouble in the first place.

Too many people get a firearm for self defense and neglect the training and I hate to see posts that reinforce that behavior.

Bottom line - we are on the same side. Let's focus our efforts where they can do some good, .

31 posted on 10/05/2009 7:03:27 PM PDT by NY.SS-Bar9 (DVC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: NY.SS-Bar9
Bottom line - we are on the same side. Let's focus our efforts where they can do some good,

I concur, we are on the same side. There are many people who do not train enough including the police, and there are many people who do not ever cross over in their mental preparation.

People who do not come to grips with pulling the trigger before hand are far more likely to freeze or panic than others. Additionally, I'm not sure that timidity can be trained out of people. The military did extensive studies after WWII and determined that 10% of front line troops were doing 90% of the shooting, despite all of the training they had gone through. While conducting military training, one of major problems I had was with the reluctance to commit to action, even when the ROE clearly allowed it.

For this reason, I consider the talks I have with my wife about self-defense to be more valuable than range time. I want her to cross that bridge mentally many times, so that she hopefully won't hesitate if the time comes. I find this mental imaging and role playing very useful.

Fluidity with a weapon is a wonderful thing to add after that.

32 posted on 10/05/2009 8:07:32 PM PDT by SampleMan (No one should die on a gov. waiting list., or go broke because the gov. has dictated their salary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: NY.SS-Bar9
If you seriously believe that five minutes is all it takes to be proficient with a firearm in a stressful situation, you obviously know nothing about personal protection.

Obviously more training is better. Someone with only five minutes' training would likely be a dead duck against a determined adversary who had more, but most potential attackers are neither well-trained nor are they particularly determined. Even if the woman has only a 10% chance of scoring a disabling hit on the adversary and a 90% chance of ending up dead, most crooks won't be eager to settle for a 90% chance of surviving their attack when they can boost their survival odds to 100% by running away.

33 posted on 10/06/2009 4:18:31 PM PDT by supercat (Barry Soetoro == Bravo Sierra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson