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.
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:
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.
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.
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.
Moderator's Warning: |
Moderator's Warning: Threads merged
Woah, I was confused, You did that as I clicked on the other one and thought that posters were double posting.... Even me.... :shock:
If there's any one thing good to be said about GWB, this is certainly it.I must say that this is all Bush's fault. Thank you, GW, for installing judges who support the Second Amendment. :mrgreen:
And now you know who's really awesome. :2razz:
Yes, the Good Reverend, but I was talking about your mod shennanigans, not the Awesomeness, but I do appreciate the accolades.impdaddy:
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.
Silence from the anti-gun side. Hmm.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?