Bare Arm
Bear arms
Posted on 03/24/2009 6:11:24 AM PDT by jmaroneps37
Last June the Supreme Court handed down a ruling in the District of Columbia v. Heller case which was supposed to be a victory for the preservation of our rights under the Second Amendment, but was it?
Nine months later the value of Heller as a benchmark gun rights case is seriously in doubt. Although it unequivocally reaffirmed the rights of honest citizens to keep and bare arms, liberal courts and cities across the country have generally ignored or attacked the decision.
Adam Winkler, law professor at UCLA has commented, “To date, the federal courts have not invalidated a single gun control law on the basis of the Second Amendment since Heller.”
“My own bet,” said Sanford Levinson, a law professor at the University of Texas, “is that Heller will more likely than not turn out to be of no significance to anyone but constitutional theorists.”
Chicago’s Mayor Richard Daley rejected the very idea that Heller is binding on his city. Daly maintains that since Chicago is not under federal control, Heller means nothing to him or his city.
Liberals strike back
In reaction to Heller, Chicago Illinois Representative Bobby Rush has re-introduced federal legislation requiring universal registration of firearms.
On Dec. 16, 2008 the Democrat City Council of D.C. buoyed by Obama’s victory, passed new regulations on private gun ownership. The new law requires extensive and costly firearms training to receive or renew gun licenses.
D.C. has directly flaunted sections of Heller so much so that on July 29, just a month after his victory, Heller was forced to go back into court and sue again.
This is the liberal way: if they win, they win. If they lose, they just act as if they won and make us go back into court just to preserve our rights.
(Excerpt) Read more at collinsreport.net ...
I strongly believe the citizens of Wash DC should be encouraged (if not forced) to roll up their sleeves and get a job.
“My own bet,” said Sanford Levinson, a law professor at the University of Texas, “is that Heller will more likely than not turn out to be of no significance to anyone but constitutional theorists.”
OK, now all the liberals have been heard from...
Mayor Shortshanks says the Bill of Rights does not apply to his kingdom.
Resist..disobey..stand up for a change and don’t depend on any one else to carry the water!
That simply will not happen.
It's like bees fighting back by stinging. A bee here and there might do it, but unless you kick over the hive you won't find enough of them stinging, and the enemy survives. The left is going to be patient until we all die out slowly and singly, and there's nobody around who even remembers what a "right" is.
The spell checker curse strikes again...
Bare Arm
Bear arms
Stop it! Stop it! Stop it! I'm going to start screaming if I continue to see this posted on FR!
If this were the citizen doing this, the courts would impose PUNATIVE DAMAGES without blinking an eye.
Local tyrants will not change until they spend time in jail for contempt.
And how many such cases have made it to the federal court in the last 9 months?
You people are all too negative. No, Heller didn’t say that every person has the right to be provided with a full auto at government expense at birth, but it did make the extremely important ruling that the 2nd is a fundamental right. The particulars will be decided as time goes on, just as with the civil rights cases starting 5 1/2 decades ago. One salami slice at a time, just like the antis got us. This is not going to be an overnight thing.
Note that there is currently a suit against Chicago, asserting that it is violating the 2nd, and asserting that the 2nd applies to it via incorporation (courtesy of the 14th). It is being brought by the same attorney who won Heller, Gura. It is a simple yes or no question: does the 2nd apply to states and their subdivisions (i.e. cities) via the 14th? Here’s a link to the site: http://www.chicagoguncase.com/
Either way, it’s a win-win in the Chicago case.
Even if Daley keeps ignoring Heller, he is only asserting that the federal gov’t has little or no power over the states. For the states to recognize this is what the DC elite are scared of.
Absolutely! The days have come. It is no longer enough to sit around on our hiney, give money to some organization (NRA), and hope all turns out okay. Really, we are going to have to be willing to take the streets or else we risk losing this nation.
Most localities whose laws were challenged have decided to repeal those laws rather than fight a losing battle. The other cases are slowly making their way through the court system.
TOTALLY uncalled for :)
Incorporation my boy, Incorporation.
They’re is also about a mile wide loophole, for “reasonable restrictions”. And the states are driving a truck through it.
My bet is the Court will put on its two faced "selective incorporation doctrine" and say that the right of the States to form an orderly militia says no, just like they did with Kelo.
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.