Court Hears Second Amendment Debate On City Ban

As they hear arguments in a case to against Chicago's nearly 30-year-old handgun ban, the U.S. Supreme Court appears willing to say that the Constitution's right to possess guns limits state and local regulation of firearms. ~snip

"We have the right for health and safety to pass reasonable laws dealing with the protection and health of the people of the city of Chicago," Daley said.

"This is the first time; once you start doing this, you'll start breaking down local laws, county and even state laws – unlawful use of a weapon," Mayor Daley said.

Hypocrite Democrat Daley, who is all for expanding the Federal government into every other aspect of our lives, is now worried about local, county, and states rights.

In further news...

"We have a right to use lethal force to defend the Constitution against all politicians trampling it," citizens said.

>”We have the right for health and safety to pass reasonable laws dealing with the protection and health of the people of the city of Chicago,” Daley said.

Well, you filthy and corrupt waste of human flesh, why do you only allow your stinking city
officials to carry a means of self defense?

“This is the first time; once you start doing this, you’ll start breaking down local laws, county and even state laws – unlawful use of a weapon,” Mayor Daley said.

Then deal with “unlawful use” if the case merits it you mealy mouth pig...and if some would-be attacker
gets a hollowpoint in the chest, you don’t get to claim it as “unlawful use”.

I hate this case because as much as I despise gun control to my core, Daley is right. The Bill of Rights was written to limit the powers of the federal government and has nothing to do with the states. In fact, one of the states (Maryland??) had an established religion well after passage. The men who fought for the Bill of Rights did so specifically because they feared federal power encroaching on states' rights. To say the Bill of Rights also applies to the states is a complete bastardization of constitutional theory.

The Supreme Court, no stranger to bastardization, decided in the 1900s that a magical new power existed, and it was called the Doctrine of Incorporation. This meant that there in essence was just one government, and the Constitution applies to it at all levels. Except not all the Constitution. You better believe the First Amendment was incorporated, especially as it pertains to establishment of religion. The Second Amendment somehow only applied to the federal government.

So here we are now. We either opportunistically embrace completely unconstitutional incorporation because we love gun rights, or we say Chicago has a right to its gun ban. If you're a liberal (or a Supreme Court justice), you'd pick the outcome you wanted and argue for it.

And this is where Daley is. He now uses an originalist argument in one specific case. OK, Mr. Mayor, can we establish Christianity as Chicago's official religion? Being consistent isn't a burden for liberals.

... one of the states (Maryland??) had an established religion well after passage.

The Congregational Church was the official state church of both Massachusetts and Connecticut until well into the 19th Century. You paid taxes to the Church regardless of your own faith; nonchurch-members were barred from civil office. I suspect there were other such among the original 13.

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.