Breaking News 2A SCOTUS CHALLENGE!!!

[Mike Weber]

2A SCOTUS challenge
~~ KeepAndBearArms.com Breaking News ~~

11 February 2003

Second Amendment Lawsuit Will Be Appealed to Supreme Court

-- Fundamental Gun Rights Issues Require Resolution

The campaign to support this potentially historic case is
being run by Citizens of America and KeepAndBearArms.com.

For information on this support campaign and the many issues
involved, click here:

http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com/Silveira/scotus.asp

Silveira v. Lockyer support campaign leaders say, "The
immediate support of American gun owners is crucial in
achieving the best preparation for this case. We ask you
to step forward at this time and do whatever you can
financially to help make this happen."

PLEASE -- FORWARD THIS NEWS BULLETIN to
ALL FRIENDS, LISTS, BULLETIN BOARDS,
DISCUSSION FORUMS, AND ORGANIZATIONS

 

[Blackhawk]

Excellent, and WELL WORTH supporting!

I take it that the 9CA has not yet ruled on hearing the case en banc?

 

[MitchSchaft]

Brace yourselves!

 

[Sven]

Wow - this is big.

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Silveira/scotus.asp

 

[UnknownSailor]

Isn't this the case the NRA wants no part of, and a NRA affiliated lawyer has been actively trying to stop?

 

[Open Carry]

Should I help fund this effort or should I use every dollar I can get a hold of to buy every evil gun I can find?

 

[twoblink]

Support RKBA the smart way; spend your money on taking a newbie shooting..

You buy a gun or give the causes a dollar; you get a dollar in return... You take a newbie shooting, who knows, they might turn out to become an Oleg or a Tamara; which infinitely is a better ROI.

 

[BogBabe]

twoblink, and Open Carry, I think this effort is well worth supporting. If the gun control trend continues in its current direction, you may soon not be able to buy evil guns or take a newbie shooting.

 

[Diesle]

Question, isnt the courts back against a wall on this...? If they rule that the language protects militia only, not individuals, cant we just then suggest that we are a part of a militia....???

Im willing to carry my militia membership card with me. I just made it on my PC here. Im a proud member of Diesle's Militia.

Ref: http://www.city-net.com/~davekle/who_mlta.html


Toung firmly in cheek,

Diesle

 

[publius]

Unknown Sailor,

Yes, this is the case. It's caused division in more than one area within the gun community.

Gorski appealed to the infamously liberal, frequently overturned U.S. Ninth Circuit Court. The only court that can overturn this Ninth Circuit Court ruling is the U.S. Supreme Court.

As expected, a three-judge panel dismissed all of Gorski’s claims but — unexpectedly — one: the court agreed with Gorski that retired police officers were not “super citizens†who were exempt from the semi-auto ban. Good for Mr. Gorski! Now these retired officers must join us in this fight if they want their freedoms back.

This part caused many otherwise pro-gun cops to oppose Gorski. Their thinking was that they had served the community for years, been trained with firearms, and this was not super-citizen status, but a kind of retirement benefit. I don't agree, but it's not a completely unreasonable position.

The really divisive part is summed up here...

The worst Supreme Court ruling would be that: (1) the Second Amendment — unlike other Amendments in the Bill of Rights — can be ignored by the states, and/or that (2) the Second Amendment — unlike other amendments using the words “ the people†— does not actually refer to “the people†or their individual rights. That would mean the “new†Second Amendment is now shrunken, in effect, to “The right of the states to arm militias cannot be infringed by the federal governmentâ€. In practice, this would mean that the federal government (which controls interpretation of the Constitution) and any state government would have the power to ban any firearm it chose to ban, including bolt action or lever-action rifles. This would be quite shocking to every gun owner in America. But it would make it absolutely clear that the Supreme Court will uphold the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment only when it feels like it. What Americans would do about that situation would remain to be seen.

The fear is that what Americans would do about that situation is...drumroll please....live with it. This may sound hard to believe, until you consider that living with it is exactly what we're already doing, which is why this case may be heard by the Supremes.

 

[publius]

By the way, for those who agree with the retired cops and/or with the NRA, or for whatever reason are unhappy about this case, you should read this:

THE BOTTOM LINE:

Mr. Gorski and the plaintiffs are committed to taking Silveira v. Lockyer to the Supreme Court — that decision is out of our hands, and we accept it as reality.

Given that information, your choice now is to either stand on the sidelines and hope for the best, or help Mr. Gorski prepare the best, most complete, most powerful case possible for affirming our individual right to own and use firearms. Help us do the latter by donating right now to the tax-exempt partner in this project, Citizens Of America:

I think I'll go visit the donation page and give them some e-gold right now.

 

[Master Blaster]

Worst Ruling? The worst Supreme Court ruling would be that: (1) the Second Amendment — unlike other Amendments in the Bill of Rights — can be ignored by the states, and/or that (2) the Second Amendment — unlike other amendments using the words “ the people†— does not actually refer to “the people†or their individual rights. That would mean the “new†Second Amendment is now shrunken, in effect, to “The right of the states to arm militias cannot be infringed by the federal governmentâ€. In practice, this would mean that the federal government (which controls interpretation of the Constitution) and any state government would have the power to ban any firearm it chose to ban, including bolt action or lever-action rifles. This would be quite shocking to every gun owner in America. But it would make it absolutely clear that the Supreme Court will uphold the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment only when it feels like it. What Americans would do about that situation would remain to be seen.

The worst case is already a fact. Just ask the residents of NY, New Jersey, and CA.

As the current situation exists any state can ban any weapon or class of weapons that they want, and they can restrict anyone they want from owning any firearm at all, or EVEN a BB GUN.

I fail to see a downside to this suit.

I will contribute to the cause and i urge others to do the same.

NRA = No Rights Anymore, I am a member but I fail to see what the NRA is really doing.

 

[dustind]

i think we need to get everyone to jump on this, this could be the biggest gun turning point ever

 

[GhostShooter]

Did I miss something here. They haven't even agreed to hear the case yet. Given the USSC's track record I don't think they will.

 

[Blackhawk]

Did I miss something here. They haven't even agreed to hear the case yet. Given the USSC's track record I don't think they will.

Yes, you did miss something. They're committed and PREPARING to take this thing to the top. There's no assurance that the SCOTUS will hear any case, but the clock starts ticking when the 9CA's decision becomes final, and any writ to the SCOTUS has to be filed within a fixed time after that. Preparation is fundamental to victory in any contest.

 

[Frohickey]

twoblink makes a good point, that if you can only do one thing, you should take a newbie out for a fun day shooting and introduce them to the shooting sports.

But... we humans are capable of multi-tasking.

Walking and chewing gum.
Scanning the area while tactically reloading.
Shouting 'STOP! Drop the knife', while putting two COM shots into the BG.

All of us should have already been introducing newbies to the shooting sports. Thats already a given for me. I think I can dig into the wallet and fish out a $5 or $10. In the long run, all that is, is perhaps lunch at a fast-food restaurant, or two. So its cheap in comparison.

.....

Whataminute!!! $5 or $10 is not cheap. Imagine what would happen if Gary Gorski were successful in arguing the merits of the case to the SCOTUS! Gun control laws would be struck down. Assault weapon bans will be struck down. Standard magazine capacity bans will be struck down. That would mean at least $2000+ worth of new sport-utility weapons!

 

[Blackhawk]

Frohickey makes a better point....

 

[MitchSchaft]

I donated some cash.

 

[Russ]

This is probably still years away. The full 9th Ciruit hasn't heard the case yet. It has only been heard by a 3 judge panel. Unless the whole 9th hears it, SCOTUS isn't going to take it. Even if the full 9th does, the SCOTUS may not take it. Even if they do, who knows what the make-up of the court will be 10 years from now.

 

[publius]

Russ is right. My guess is that the SC will refuse to hear the case. It's the path of least resistance. If they take the case, no matter which way they rule, they've just poked a hornet nest. People don't do that unless they really need to, and in this case, they don't need to. They can refuse to hear the case, no boats will be rocked out in the state capitols, millions will continue to live in gun-grabbing states, a few of us will be briefly upset, and life will go on.

Hope I'm wrong, and I did give them some gold just on the off chance that I'm wrong.

 

[Open Carry]

This is the same court that decided US v. Lopez. As far as being years away, Lopez was arrested in 1992 and the SC decided the case in 1995. O'Connor seems to be the weak link that could go against us. Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas should be on our side.

 

[spartacus2002]

Hmmm, what funny timing.

I wrote a letter to the NRA, asking what support (if any) they had provided to Gorski in this case, and what their position was. I got a letter back yesterday from their General Counsel, who basically said "well, this case just isn't the basket in which we want to put the NRA's eggs." and blamed it on the judges. He did say that if it goes to SCOTUS, NRA might file an amicus brief.

I can understand the reluctance to declare EVERY gun case to be THE CASE OF A LIFETIME--IT WILL SHAKE THE WORLD!!!! but I'm not sure I saw the downside for the NRA on this one.

I think (and this is speculation) that the NRA's lack of support is a matter of the NRA's makeup. NRA contains many different constituencies: hunters, sport shooters, serious target shooters -- and the folks who like so-called "assault weapons." Not surprisingly, the latter get looked down on by the duck hunters, precision target shooters, etc. Since this was an assault weapon case, the NRA may have had some disdain for it.

 

[Jeeper]

There is no way in HELL that SCOTUS will take this case. First off only about 2-3% of appeals are ever heard. This issue is way too hot for them to take. IT isnt even the case we want to go to them anyway. We need a more direct case about individual freedom. Even if it was appealed to them and they took it, they could decide the case without saying anything about an individual right.

 

[Pendragon]

Russ is right. My guess is that the SC will refuse to hear the case. It's the path of least resistance. If they take the case, no matter which way they rule, they've just poked a hornet nest. People don't do that unless they really need to, and in this case, they don't need to. They can refuse to hear the case, no boats will be rocked out in the state capitols, millions will continue to live in gun-grabbing states, a few of us will be briefly upset, and life will go on.

The reason SC Justices are lifers is so that they can make rulings without considerin how popular they might be.

Only thing is - they are human and most humans do not like to be unpopular.

 

[Shamaya]

Good Conversation.

Jeeper said:

There is no way in HELL that SCOTUS will take this case. First off only about 2-3% of appeals are ever heard. This issue is way too hot for them to take. IT isnt even the case we want to go to them anyway. We need a more direct case about individual freedom. Even if it was appealed to them and they took it, they could decide the case without saying anything about an individual right.

"No way in HELL that SCOTUS will take this case" is a gross overstatement implying "impossible." It's indeed a challenge, but it's also quite possible. With Emerson in the 5th Circuit recently standing correctly on RKBA, the opposed circuits issue is definitely in play.

Better yet, you might also want to take a good, close, considered look at the individual whose work we are fortunate enough to be able to utilize in this case. Go here; you can read it in approx. 2 minutes: About Roy Lucas.

Re: "too hot for them to take," people said that about the Roe case way back when, too -- and many others.

RE: "We need a more direct case about individual freedom." If an individual being flatly denied the right to keep and bear arms under bans of entire classifications of firearms isn't about individual freedom, I don't know what is.

RE: "Even if it was appealed to them and they took it, they could decide the case without saying anything about an individual right."

You might consider reading the original complaint before making such statements. The entire premise of the complaint sits squarely on the nature of the Second Amendment being an individual right. And the petition for certiorari is going to outshine the original complaint by order of magnitude.

I've had the misfortune of interacting personally with people who've been arrested for violating California's so-called "Assault Weapons" ban. It's not pretty. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is 100% infringed by that "law". Our fight against that law is righteous, just, sound, fair, reasonable and necessary -- millions of people live under the ban; they are individuals; and their freedom is being denied under threat of violent government force and either imprisonment or, if they resist, death.

To those who've supported our efforts, thank you. As we developed a Gameplan on this case, I found myself finally having some excitement about the future of the RPKBA for the first time in too long. The prepared documents for this case will be available for future cases if cert petition is denied -- but we honestly have a shot at getting this case heard, and the legal team is going to prepare the best possible case our side could hope for.