Court rules in favor of Second Amendment gun right
Create Post
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27
  1. #1

    Court rules in favor of Second Amendment gun right

    WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

    The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

    The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

    The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

    Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for four colleagues, said the Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home."

    In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."

    He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."
    Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.
    The capital's gun law was among the nation's strictest.

    Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller's favor and struck down Washington's handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.

    The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.

    Scalia said nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."

    The law adopted by Washington's city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.
    Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

  2. #2
    This is a Great Day for the Citizens of the District Of Columbia

  3. #3
    This should have been a 9-0 vote. I find it alarming that four members on our activist Supreme Court chose to ignore the individual’s guaranteed right under the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution to keep and bear arms.

  4. #4
    Bad day for bad guys in DC! (I meant petty thieves, not congress, the white house, 4/9ths of the supreme court.) It is good to see the court get one right every once in awhile; even if it is just barely!
    Kegler; you're absolutely right!

  5. #5
    I am with you Kegler. It should have been 9 - 0. Political activism is alive and well.

  6. #6
    Liberal political activism is alive and well. The vote was split along party lines, clearly indicating the left's agenda to take away individual rights in this country.

    I heard Nobama's incoherent, babbling response on the radio...I need to get a transcript because he made absolutely no sense whatsoever.

  7. #7
    Hopefully when the next CIC gets in he will replace some of those liberals..

  8. #8
    Yes it should have been 9-0

  9. #9
    Guest Free Member

    The 2nd Amendment stands.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by yellowwing View Post

    The 2nd Amendment stands.
    Until we get some other idiot appointed that will swing the vote the other way.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by MarineNCO View Post
    Until we get some other idiot appointed that will swing the vote the other way.
    Thankfully there's not a whole lot, if any precedent of a Supreme Court ruling over turning a previous Supreme Court ruling. There can always be a first.

    Obama is a bliberring idiot when he tries to talk with out a teleprompter or note cards. He has no idea what to say or how to say it. Reminds me of Bush speaking off the cuff.

  12. #12


    Bravo...Bravo... Bravo..

    Even a broke clock is right twice a day,and this gives hope for the Supreme Courts future rulings.They got one right,but it should have been 9-0.The four Socialist judges , can always be counted on to rule in this manner.The losers are the thugs in DC and the crime abetting liberals.

  13. #13
    After their decision to give the terrorists a chance to be let out on our streets by allowing them our rights and access to slick tongue lawyers that's the least they could do. They ought to be issueing everyone a means to defend his or herself against those who will be benefitting from their earleir decision.

  14. #14
    Strap them there guns on boys its party time..

  15. #15
    lets get them ropes ready too.. Time to start lynchin some thugs.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not Create Posts
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts