Here's a clue;
None!
Posted on 03/13/2012 11:19:37 AM PDT by rellimpank
To gun-rights supporters, the Supreme Court’s District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago decisions may have felt like a dream come true — the Court recognized an individual right to keep and bear arms, and applied that right to state and local governments. Going forward, handgun bans are off the table in the U.S.
But judging by a conference hosted by the Fordham Urban Law Journal last Friday, the two sides of the gun-control debate have simply regrouped, recalibrated their expectations, and lined up for battle once again. As definitive as Heller and McDonald may seem, they offer little guidance to lawmakers and lower courts as to what kinds of gun control are still permissible.
For the pro-gun folks, Priority No. 1 is to make sure that Heller and McDonald have some practical effect. Despite the adverse court rulings, Washington, D.C., and Chicago have replaced their handgun bans with onerous requirements — such as registration and training — designed to discourage citizens from owning guns. A bill before the D.C. council would eliminate some requirements, as would a court case filed by Dick Heller (the plaintiff from the original decision). Numerous lawsuits have also been filed against Chicago’s post-ban regulations. While New York City has never banned guns outright, it too makes it difficult and expensive for residents to own guns and is facing court challenges
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
“below the radar”
No more libs working on gun bans.
Micro engraving each bullet, making sure that lead bullets are illegal and banned as pollutants, getting firearms to have biometric electronic locks.
No problem, we all can have firearms, but the firearms will be regulated as will their ammo. (/sarcasm)
Seriously, the anti-gun folks will as said, just regroup and wait to try different things at the edges of the second amendment so that they can try to get a total ban at some point in the future where their political position is stronger.
Hopefully, the courts and others will start to recognize that there are a set of “rights” protected by the constitution and the 2nd amendment is one of them.
There is no reason that during a second Obama term, he could tilt the court and they could even reverse Heller and McDonald.
Here's a clue;
None!
—having watched the Republidunces “campaign” with horror for several months, that is one of my greater fears-—
From Heller:
We know of no other enumerated constitutional right whose core protection has been subjected to a freestanding “interest-balancing” approach.
...
But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.
With the present make-up of the Supreme Court, the anti-gunners are in deep, deep trouble. I would not dream of voting for Romney in November except for the almost certain fact that his nominees for the Supreme Court will be superior to Obama's, if only slightly.
The last nail in the anti-gunner's coffin will come with a ruling that the government may not charge fees or demand that gun-owners pay for expensive training. When the entire cost of various infringements comes out of the same funds that support school-teachers, many gun laws will fall.
When my transferring of a firearm costs the liberals their budgets, I will be transferring arms like they were baseball trading cards. (If, that is, I can recover my arms from the bottom of the lake where I experienced an unfortunate boating accident.)
Actually, the Court only recognized a right to keep arms. The issue of a right to bear arms, commonly called "carrying" today, was not before the Court.
They just won’t pass any laws to accomplish their goals. They’ll do it through the courts and ATF. There’s also a complete run-around the individual right to bear arms, but I won’t put it here so as not to give any Democrats reading any ideas.
Thanks for the printer friendly link!
Heller and McDonald just started a new war that will be fought in the courts for decades.
A second Obama term could change the makeup of the SCOTUS, resulting in every restriction being “reasonable”, thereby limiting your right to keep and bear arms to the boundaries of your house.
—yep—I am hoping the Republidunces can soon put all other considerations aside and work on the only important thing for the nation—the removal of THE ONE from office and gaining control of the Senate while retaining the House—
—I usually try and do that although when using an old computer with XP some of the time it won’t copy or link-—
No, I don't agree with Mr. VerBruggen's viewpoint. Instead, we have the momentum. We should seize that momentum to put a stop to the incrementalists on the left trying to get back some of the ground that they have lost.
The best way to do this is to propose bold legislation elimination all federal gun control laws.
I believe that most of these laws are located in two portions of the federal code, in Title 18 and in Title 26. Both Title 18 and Title 26 guff are derived from the NFA, the FFA, the GCA, and the FOPA. (Please FReepmail me if I have missed any other sections of the U.S. code related to the private ownership of firearms.)
Here's my proposed text for a repeal:
Federal Firearms Freedom Act
1) United States Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 44 is hereby repealed in its entirety. 2) United States Code Title 26, Subtitle E, Chapter 53 is hereby repealed in its entirety.
The first part takes care of all of 922 and 923. The second part takes care of the Internal Revenue Code related to 922 and 923.
It's time to end all federal gun control.
It’ll never work...
Too many people are skeered of those of us who own and know how to use these here guns...
even better would be a concrete definition of 'shall NOT be infringed'...
that would shake things up for a few days...heheheh...
That'd work except the RATs pay an army of flunkies to scan bills for exactly that sort of language. Mostly these are super liberal Georgetown kids trying to angle their way into law school for a little bit of an official nudge from a congresscritter. It works for all concerned, even if the American public is royally screwed. What else is new?
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.