Posted on 03/21/2012 6:21:40 AM PDT by marktwain
t’s a centuries-old debate: Whether people should be able to own guns, what kind, how many, and under what circumstances.
Gun shows are a part of that debate. A case being heard by the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals was brought by a couple named Russell and Sallie Nordyke, who want to host guns shows in Alameda, Marin, and San Mateo counties. Currently, those counties ban gun shows.
At issue is whether people have the right under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to sell guns whenever and wherever they want. The Nordykes claim that local governments don’t have a right to restrict them from holding their gun shows.
Experts on both sides of the issue note that this case could have major implications for gun rights nationwide.
Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor and author of a book on second amendment rights, said:
“This could be the next big gun case to go to the Supreme Court.”
The Nordykes have so far lost their appeals, including the one they made in 2009 when a federal panel ruled that the Alameda county ban could stand.
Even if the ninth circuit court rules against the Nordykes, it’s expected that the case will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Given the Roberts court’s record in recent years of striking down state gun laws, this local ban could be the next big win for gun rights advocates.
“It’s a centuries-old debate: Whether people should be able to own guns,....”
Unless I’m mistaken, that first “debate” is settled by the Constitution.
‘t’s a centuries-old debate:...’
Only by statists and those bent on genocide....
“MAKE NO LAW” so simple a statement that only a lawyer/judge would dare to ignore it but ignore it they do. TRAITORS!
If we follow the “logic” of the National Socialist Left, not providing a product for free equates to it’s being banned.
For the Left, “access” means someone else has to pay for it – and if it’s not paid for by someone else, “access” is being denied.
SO, if we follow their line of “Thinking”, the gun shows should not only be allowed, the guns should also be provided free of charge – lest they be considered to be banned.
See how much fun it is to explore the ‘mind’ of the National Socialist Left?
The Right of the People, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Period. Full stop.
Two interesting LEGAL points here. These two points are in conflict, as they are in all good legal cases.
Governments are given far-ranging “police” powers to regulate many things. For “Right of Assembly” and “Right of Redress” does not deny municipalities the ability to issue or deny certain parade and assembly permits. This power extends to commercial assembly as well.
But, on the other hand, back in the days of the “Blue Laws,” when state laws forced businesses to close on Sundays, the one thing they could not prohibit was the sale of newspapers, or force the closing of the stores that sold them.
Will be an interesting case. Will be appealed to SCOTUS, but they (as in any case) may not grant certiorari.
This might go beyond whether local governments can limit gun transactions. If the SCOTUS chooses to, it might extend this ruling to take a serious hit on the “Ol’ Frank” Roosevelt grotesque expansion of the interstate commerce clause to regulate intra-state commerce as well.
That is, could go to a major argument of the 10th Amendment movement, which asserts that guns and ammunition produced in a state, *solely* for use and sale in that state, are outside of *federal* authority to regulate.
That is, such regulation is reserved for the individual states.
In turn, this would be a huge hit to the ridiculous expansion of federal power since “Ol’ Frank”. It takes on one of the two “ridiculous extrapolations” from the constitution (the other being the “general welfare” clause), that have been used by the Democrats to create a socialist America.
That's reason number 45,362 Marxists hate the Constitution.
I dug and dug.
His arsenal turned out to be a rare gun collection. His brother was also an expert shooter who participated in events all over the country and even had a few gun invention patents.
At issue is whether people have the right under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to sell guns whenever and wherever they want. The Nordykes claim that local governments don’t have a right to restrict them from holding their gun shows.
With three more paragraphs, this idiot could have misstated the issue three more ways!
Actually, while I'm sure they might be able to enumerate 45,000 reasons they hate it, I'm sure this reason ranks MUCH closer to #1. Probably in the top five at least.
This Republic is screaming down the tracks to civil war... like a runaway steam locomotive.
LLS
Imagine the furor if the county had banned shows demonstrating and supporting the sale of contraceptives on county property. Sandra Fluke would have a coronary.
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.