Calif. ruling called gun-control landmark

United Press International ^ | 12/6/2002 8:39 AM | National Desk

[Mulder]

doesn't say anything about citizens being allowed to own semi-automatic weapons or any other firearms.

The second amendment doesn't "allow" anything. It simply enumerates Rights that we as a Free people already have.

What a bunch of tyrannical judges have to say about this issue is irrelevant, except for the fact that it puts them on the record as being "domestic enemies of the Constitution".

The bastards could repeal the 2nd amendment tomorrow, and every single American would still have the Right to keep and bear arms.

[Liberal Classic]

Exactly. The 2nd doesn't allow people to do anything, rather the opposite. It bars the government from doing a thing. Just another lawyer debating what the meaning of 'is' is. Obviously, the 9th circuit has a problem understanding "right of the people shall not be infringed."

[harpseal]

The Soap Box
Campaign Finance Reform and politically correct speech codes are taking away this option.

The Ballot Box
See Campaign Finance Reform raised by vote fraud.

The Jury Box

See the Ninth Circuit opinion and rulings regarding jury nullification for this going away.

And the Ammo Box.

The absolute last resort.

The appelate court cited such marvelous sources as a Parade magazine interview with Warren Burger and Arming America by Michael Bellesies (Sp??? - veracity none).

Stay well - STAY SAFE - STAY ARMED - YORKTOWN

[harpseal]

At this point the Supreme Court of the United States has not yet taken up the issue of the conflicts among circuits. The time has come for it to do so but the question is will they do it?

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

[ricer1]

In their decision the Ninth Circus stated on page 33, "Historical research shows that the use of the term 'bear arms' generally referred to the carrying of arms in military service -- not the private use of arms for personal purposes."

I'm glad they are arguing that our military should be armed.... I'd hate to have an unarmed military...

[pgyanke]

I agree. Without these people to read the Constitution to us, we might not realize that the 2nd Amendment was written to ensure the Government wouldn't step in to disarm our military. Wouldn't it stink to go into battle without your weapons...
/sarcasm off

[IMHO]

Isn't this the same collection of nitwits who said the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional?

Isn't there some way to purge the courts of idiots like this??

Yes, Judges may be impeached and removed from office.

[Big Mack]

You just have to ask yourself, what part of ",the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.". Nothing else needs to be said, it is all right there in the last half of the 2nd amendment.

[Big Mack]

You just have to ask yourself, what part of ",the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."is so confusing to the lefties? Nothing else needs to be said, it is all right there in the last half of the 2nd amendment.

[Trailerpark Badass]

What he was appealing, IIRC, was his being prohibited from possessing a firearm after his wife got a TRO issued against him when their marriage fell apart.

I believe it was the Lautenberg Amendment to the '94 Crime Bill which retroactively made those who were the subject of a domestic TRO or had been convicted of certain domestic violence misdemeanors unable to possess a firearm.

It was my understanding at the time that the assault charge ("brandishing") was levelled against him by his wife and used to discredit him in the press. I'm nearly positive he was acquitted of that.

[MrB]

I'm no jurist expert, but you would think that this is exactly what the USSC is for - to settle conflicting rulings of the federal circuit courts.

Tough situation.
The USSC could tell the 9th that they must review this before the full court (with a heavy armtwist of "we don't want this one").

BTW, did you hear Rush read Reinhardt's venom-filled, gun hating diatribe of an opinion?
Equated gun owners with McVeigh, mobs of armed racists and religious bigots.

[jsraggmann]

It's much later than we think! The Bill of Rights was DEMANDED by the Anti-Federalists, the folks led by Patrick Henry that(rightfully) didn't trust the federal govt. Our Constitution limits the power of govt, it does not limit the rights of Citizens. Things are going to get very interesting before this is resolved!

[Atlas Sneezed]

My question for dicussion:

If the USSC overturns this 9th circuit decision, by finding that the 2nd is a right of individuals, can they rule in a manner that narrowly restores the rights of Californians without also overruling the various import bans, the 1986 law that halted production of civilian-ownable machine guns, and even the NFA of 1934?

Or is there a way that the supremes could overrule the 9th without going this far?

[ZULU]

Is there somewhere we can write Bush to express our outrage at the collection of idiots which comprise this court?

Politicians listen to letters.

[Saundra Duffy]

That's California for you - the land of fruits and NUTS! Some women in California are forced to commit acts of civil disobedience by carrying concealed guns. That is because THEY DON'T WANT TO BE RAPED, TORTURED, BEHEADED OR MURDERED! (Some California women are funny that way.) For victory & freedom!!!

[<1/1,000,000th%]

The court agreed, however, that police officers that protect public safety were allowed to own firearms.

Is this a "penumbra"?

[MrB]

You've just named the worms in the can that they're afraid to open.

[GnL]

If the plaintiffs now petition the SCOTUS for certiorari, the Justice Dept can file an amicus brief with the court in support of that petition.

Of course they can. So can I, with consent of the parties. That's a long way from actually litigating the appeal, however.

[Area51]

I'm glad they are arguing that our military should be armed.... I'd hate to have an unarmed military...
85 posted on 12/06/2002 10:41 AM PST by ricer1

Yeah, then we would ALL be known as Canadians! LOL

[Travis McGee]

Waiting for new USSC justices to better our hand is a dangerous game.

We could very easily end up with more covert libs like Souter.

OTOH, even if the USSC declared no individual right, so what? They can vote 5-4 to repeal gravity or kill God, with the same effect.

If and when the USSC ever votes for the "collective interpretation", the shooting war will begin to restore the Constitution.

BTW, I was listening to Savage last night. He was taling about islamic sleeper cells committing terrorism in the USA after we attack Iraq, he said "no one is talking yet about the 30 million gun owning sleepers in our own 30 million man armed militia."

It sounded a lot like the "10 million deer rifle army" to me.

Read the last few chapters (20-23) when you can, the "shooting phase" begins there.