• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court says the Constitution's "right to keep and bear arms" applies nationwide as a restraint on the ability of government to limit its application.

The justices on Monday cast doubt on a Chicago area handgun ban, but also signaled in their 5-4 decision that less severe restrictions could survive legal challenges.
Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

More to follow as the decision is posted.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,031
Reaction score
32,882
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I misread the threat title initially as "Jesus extend(s) gun owner..." and was really confused.

Any articles with more detail? The way this one reads makes it sound like a "water is wet" decision. Well, duh, that's what the 2nd amendment does!

edit: Beat me as I was typing. :2mad:
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,398
Reaction score
16,251
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
This is certainly good news.

I think most people seem to forget this little detail about constitutional rights.
Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide
the Bill of Rights serve as a check on state and local, as well as federal, laws.
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I misread the threat title initially as "Jesus extend(s) gun owner..." and was really confused.

Any articles with more detail? The way this one reads makes it sound like a "water is wet" decision. Well, duh, that's what the 2nd amendment does!

edit: Beat me as I was typing. :2mad:
Hopefully the actual decision will be posted soon.
 

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court held Monday that the Constitution's Second Amendment restrains government's ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms," advancing a recent trend by the John Roberts-led bench to embrace gun rights.

By a narrow, 5-4 vote, the justices signaled, however, that less severe restrictions could survive legal challenges.

Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right "applies equally to the federal government and the states."

The court was split along familiar ideological lines, with five conservative-moderate justices in favor of gun rights and four liberals opposed. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority.

Two years ago, the court declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess guns, at least for purposes of self-defense in the home.

That ruling applied only to federal laws. It struck down a ban on handguns and a trigger lock requirement for other guns in the District of Columbia, a federal city with a unique legal standing. At the same time, the court was careful not to cast doubt on other regulations of firearms here.

Gun rights proponents almost immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Ill, where handguns have been banned for nearly 30 years. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says those laws appear to be the last two remaining outright bans.

Lower federal courts upheld the two laws, noting that judges on those benches were bound by Supreme Court precedent and that it would be up to the high court justices to ultimately rule on the true reach of the Second Amendment.

The Supreme Court already has said that most of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights serve as a check on state and local, as well as federal, laws.

Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall.

Still, Alito noted that the declaration that the Second Amendment is fully binding on states and cities "limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values."


Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

If anyone did not understand the importance of the Supreme Court this ruling says it all.

5-4.

Thats right. 4 of the far left loons actually would deny you the rights under the Second Amendment.

Doesn't get much scarier than that.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,398
Reaction score
16,251
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative

Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

If anyone did not understand the importance of the Supreme Court this ruling says it all.

5-4.

Thats right. 4 of the far left loons actually would deny you the rights under the Second Amendment.

Doesn't get much scarier than that.


Actually I think the title is misleading. It makes it seem as though the SC is granting rights instead of actually preserving them. Of course what else can you expect from a liberal media organization such as the AP. BTW someone else already beat you to posting the story.
 

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court held Monday that the Constitution's Second Amendment restrains government's ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms," advancing a recent trend by the John Roberts-led bench to embrace gun rights.

By a narrow, 5-4 vote, the justices signaled, however, that less severe restrictions could survive legal challenges.

Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right "applies equally to the federal government and the states."

The court was split along familiar ideological lines, with five conservative-moderate justices in favor of gun rights and four liberals opposed. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority.

Two years ago, the court declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess guns, at least for purposes of self-defense in the home.

That ruling applied only to federal laws. It struck down a ban on handguns and a trigger lock requirement for other guns in the District of Columbia, a federal city with a unique legal standing. At the same time, the court was careful not to cast doubt on other regulations of firearms here.

Gun rights proponents almost immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Ill, where handguns have been banned for nearly 30 years. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says those laws appear to be the last two remaining outright bans.

Lower federal courts upheld the two laws, noting that judges on those benches were bound by Supreme Court precedent and that it would be up to the high court justices to ultimately rule on the true reach of the Second Amendment.

The Supreme Court already has said that most of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights serve as a check on state and local, as well as federal, laws.

Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall.

Still, Alito noted that the declaration that the Second Amendment is fully binding on states and cities "limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values."


Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

If anyone did not understand the importance of the Supreme Court this ruling says it all.

5-4.

Thats right. 4 of the far left loons actually would deny you the rights under the Second Amendment.

Doesn't get much scarier than that.
I must say that this is all Bush's fault. Thank you, GW, for installing judges who support the Second Amendment. :mrgreen:
 

WhyteRash

Active member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
272
Reaction score
70
Location
mid-illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
so... this is another decision for pro-gun advocates that has happened under obamas watch. (i believe thats more in 2yrs than the last 20+)
hmm... it just seems totally against anything that was expoused relative to his alleged anti-gun "agenda".

now before anyone comes back with "it wasnt anything he did", a view which i personally hold, had anything been done to further restrict guns, it wouldve been immediately tied to him no matter the lack of any evidence contrary or otherwise.
 

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,603
Reaction score
22,539
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
There were something like 29 shootings in Chicago over the weekend, yet Daley continues to tell us that the ban is working. :roll:
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,901
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
so... this is another decision for pro-gun advocates that has happened under obamas watch. (i believe thats more in 2yrs than the last 20+)
hmm... it just seems totally against anything that was expoused relative to his alleged anti-gun "agenda".

now before anyone comes back with "it wasnt anything he did", a view which i personally hold, had anything been done to further restrict guns, it wouldve been immediately tied to him no matter the lack of any evidence contrary or otherwise.


uhm it was in spite of him. How did the judge he appoint vote?


FAIL
 

ric27

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
7,541
Reaction score
3,195
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Its gun control vs gun ownership and it will always be...Leftist looneys vs Conservatism
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I must say that this is all Bush's fault. Thank you, GW, for installing judges who support the Second Amendment. :mrgreen:
If there's any one thing good to be said about GWB, this is certainly it.
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Here is where the court 'leaves the door open' for state and local regulations:

It is important to keep in mind that Heller, while striking down a law that prohibited the possession of handguns in the home, recognized that the right to keep and bear arms is not “a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” We made it clear in Heller that our holding did not cast doubt on such longstanding regulator ymeasures as “prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill,” “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.” We repeat those assurances here. Despite municipal respondents’ doomsday proclamations, incorporation does not imperil every law regulating firearms.
This is no different than the court's statement in Heller, and in no way supports the idea that registration, licensing, gun-a-month limits, etc, will pass constitutional muster.
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Silence from the anti-gun side. Hmm.
 

d0gbreath

Yellow Dog Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
14,043
Reaction score
4,093
Location
Denton, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Yes, unless you are a convicted felon you have the right to own guns. I believe Chicago and DC are the only areas that have mandated restrictions to the 2nd amendment. Those restrictions need to be abolished.
 
Top Bottom