Skip to comments.
Calif. ruling called gun-control landmark
United Press International ^
| 12/6/2002 8:39 AM
| National Desk
Posted on 12/06/2002 7:24:08 AM PST by Liberal Classic
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-139 next last
I've seen one other post on this. This is a different article.
Of course the court neglected self defense. In the eyes of a leftist, there's no such thing. When as the 9th Circuit ever promugated a ruling that made any sense?
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said the Second Amendment only guarantees the rights of states to organize a militia
Newsflash to the 9th Circcuit: Government don't have rights. People have rights. People give government authority to do a limited number of legitimate things.
"Individual rights advocates have waved the Emerson decision like a battle flag," Nosanchuk of the Violence Policy Center.
What's the most widely known battle flag? Maybe the Confederate Battle Flag? Nice way to connect gun ownership with racism there.
To: Liberal Classic
To quote Charlton Heston "From my cold dead fingers!"
To: *bang_list
To: Joe Brower
Its an ideological ruling from the Nine Circus clowns. Of course its just like the Sarah Brady anti-gun nuts and the liberal media to wax euphoric over it as though it where a divine decree from Heaven. It ain't nothing of the kind.
To: Liberal Classic
To: Liberal Classic
The Ninth Circuit's unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel was at odds with a Fifth Circuit ruling known as the Emerson decision upholding an individual's right to possess a weapon, stating that the Second Amendment pertained to the organization of an organized, state-sponsored militia, and not "an 'unregulated' mob of armed individuals." "Individual rights advocates have waved the Emerson decision like a battle flag," Nosanchuk said in a statement. "All they have done is awaken a sleeping giant of clear legal thinking and sound historical analysis that finds that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to own a gun."
Hey, Nosanchuk - how come you didn't mention the fact that the 9th Circuit has decisions overturned by SCOTUS far more often than any other circuit?
6
posted on
12/06/2002 7:29:57 AM PST
by
dirtboy
To: Joe Brower
To: Liberal Classic
A left-wing appeals court rules directly contrary to another more conservative ruling, and the left-wing decision is a "landmark." Then what was the conservative ruling?
8
posted on
12/06/2002 7:31:32 AM PST
by
IronJack
To: goldstategop
True, but it will likely prompt appeals. I wonder if we're ready for that going to SCOTUS.
To: IronJack
Left-wing decisions are always "landmark" or "ground breaking." Conservative decisions are always "steps backwards" or "dangerous." Didn't you get the memo? ;)
To: WorkingClassFilth
Yup we are. And this time there is NO WAY the SCOTUS will be able to AVOID ruling exactly what rights the Second Amendment does ENSURE Americans.
To: goldstategop
"Yup we are. And this time there is NO WAY the SCOTUS will be able to AVOID ruling exactly what rights the Second Amendment does ENSURE Americans."
Excuse my repost from another thread...
"Maybe our collectivist friends feel that conditions are such that forcing a 2nd Amendment decision from the Supreme Court is a now-or-never proposition. With future propects for liberal bench receding, perhaps they feel that they better spend their political capital (and use their FBI files) to get the decision they want - IOW, collective rights."
To: goldstategop
This will not stand.
To: Liberal Classic
This must not stand! Please, Someone, appeal this to
the Supreme Court.
To: Liberal Classic
Didn't you get the memo? I saw it posted in the men's room. I just thought the regular rolled stuff had run out ...
15
posted on
12/06/2002 7:43:59 AM PST
by
IronJack
To: Liberal Classic
In a 72-page ruling issued Thursday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said the Second Amendment only guarantees the rights of states to organize a militia, and doesn't say anything about citizens being allowed to own semi-automatic weapons or any other firearms. ...
... California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said the state had no desire to take away the rights of people to hunt or to protect themselves and their homes, however the state was intent on keeping high-powered weapons off the streets.
Okaaayyy...
So there's no right for the citizens to have guns but the government has no desire to take away the rights of citizens to have guns...
If their official decision reads like this, it should be an easy appeal.
16
posted on
12/06/2002 7:51:06 AM PST
by
pgyanke
To: pgyanke
What Attorney General Lockyer is saying is they won't ban handguns for now. But if this Nine Circus joke stands up on appeal to the SCOTUS you can be sure the next step will be to ban all private gun ownership in California.
To: goldstategop
It's time for the W administration to step up to the plate. No more excuses. Let's settle this now.
It's time for a plain english statement from the highest court in the land affirming the plain truth of the second amendmant.
I won't be holding my breath.
To: goldstategop
.. the next step will be to ban all private gun ownership in California.
Good luck telling that to the street thugs in Oakland and LA... much less decent and god-fearing citizens who believe in the 2nd Amendment.
To: Liberal Classic
What's the most widely known battle flag? Maybe the Confederate Battle Flag? Nice way to connect gun ownership with racism there. So you're saying that people who wave a Confederate flag are racists?
20
posted on
12/06/2002 8:00:28 AM PST
by
A2J
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-139 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson