Federal Judge says public housing gun ban is unconstitutional

Fox 17 News ^ | 04/13/2019 | Fox17

[genghis]

40 yo black femals with no crimal record should be given glocks or ar15s

[Magnum44]

Federal law prohibits private guns on federal property like military installations, post offices, federal buildings, and such. Not saying I like this, just that this is the case. So one question is “is this housing federal property or leased?” From this judges point of view maybe that might make a difference. I’m not sure what the situation is for military families in base housing these days. I seem to recall back in the eighties and nineties that folks had firearms on base in their homes.

[Lurker]

Considering your position on the Waco matter you’re just about the last person on Earth anyone should take seriously on the Constitution.

L

[mad_as_he$$]

+2.

[TexasGator]

ROTFLMAO!

[TexasGator]

No facts. Just a trolling personal attack.

[TexasGator]

Hijacker

[Lurker]

“No facts.”

Would you like me to dig up a few Waco threads and quote you? I seem to recall you cheering the mass arrests, phony indictments, and outrageous bail amounts.

I’ll be happy to pull up a few of your more relevant quotes for everyone on the thread to enjoy if that’s your wish.

I haven’t seen you post on any of the latest ones. You know, the ones where not a single conviction was obtained, the ones noting the Prosecutor resigned in disgrace, and that the City and County are now on the hook for millions of dollars in damages.

Any reason for that? You had plenty to say back then. Why so quiet on the subject now?

L

[Lurker]

“Hijacker”

Nope. Just pointing up the fact that listening to a legal opinion from you is akin to getting recipes from Jeffrey Dahmer.

L

[AAABEST]

But it’s public housing, owned by a government that is supposed to honor Constitutional rights.

This.

[JoSixChip]

But the housing is still in the US and the Constitution is valid there too.

Don't be silly, it has nothing to do with the constitution. No one is saying they can't own or use guns. What they are saying is that they can not have guns in public housing. If they don't want to live by those rules, move somewhere else. It's no different they saying you can't carry a gun in the court house.

[ronnie raygun]

A win for the thug gang members and criminals who will now have complete control over their buildings. A Fire arm free zone for those who will now be victims

[Wuli]

On constitutional grounds I likely agree.

Though, knowing that crime rates in government housing areas are often among the highest in a city, I do suspect the consequences of greater gun possession in those housing complexes will not be “great”.

[itsahoot]

Now, have you ever been in the military?

Actually I have and I remember ordering a handgun from Cline's and keeping it in my locker, no problem. That was around 1958. Doubt that would fly today.

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like where men were free. ~ Ronald Reagan

[itsahoot]

If they don't want to live by those rules, move somewhere else. It's no different they saying you can't carry a gun in the court house.

And if a State bans your guns you should just move, got it.

[i_robot73]

>
“Now, if only a\some judge(s) would correctly rule ‘public housing\welfare’ is a violation of the Takings clause, we’d be going somewhere...”

How so?
>

$$$ == property. We’er not talking EVERYONE pays for the public park in the city here. Let alone the rent controls of some cities, zoning\community engineering (bought under once auspice when the board comes around saying, “No, you can’t do ABC there.”).

Better then to umbrella it w/in the 13th instead? Is sure trumps the A1S8 a/o 9th/10th violations