Heller Decided! (several threads merged, new ones will be locked)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anyone know the status on the challenges to 922o as of now?
Click to expand...
Realistically, there's no way in heck that the Supreme Court is going to rule that we have a Constitutional right to machine guns. There are five justices who agreed that there is at least a minimal right to have guns for self-defense and hunting; I highly doubt that there are five who'll sign off on a "machine-gun free-for-all."

There is a huge gulf between what was decided today, and a general right to keep and bear machine guns.
 
I was intrigued by the following:

"Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those ‘in common use at the time.’

As I would read it that would mean that 2A is an EVOLVING right with technology.

Anyone have input on wether knives and non-lethal weapons are covered? For instance TASERs etc. The opinion talks about arms rather than guns exclusively.
 
It is true that banning guns has little to no impact on crime within a "gun society". But don't forget that gun control does work wonders in "gun free societies". compare Japans crime rate with the US and there is no comparison......the US crime rate is 6x greater.

I'm all for gun ownership in the US....and I do own guns. We live in a gun society and banning gun ownership only leaves guns in the hands of criminals. While I whole heartedly believe in the 2nd A. and what the founding fathers intended I believe our society has moved way beyond that reality. A modern "militia" would stand absolutely NO CHANCE against US military forces......parity was lost a LONG time ago. So....protect yourself and your loved ones.....but the ability to overthrow our government (which was the founding fathers intentions...should the need arise) has long past.
 
Well, since I no longer drink, I think I'll celebrate by buying another AK (neutered though it is in my state)! Three cheers for liberty!!
 
My eyes glazed over after the first few pages of Heller thread content. So without having read most of any of these threads, I have this to say...

Heller opinion by Scalia said:
Worse still, the phrase “keep and bear Arms” would be incoherent. The word “Arms” would have two different meanings at once: “weapons” (as the object of “keep”) and (as the object of “bear”) one-half of an idiom. It would be rather like saying “He filled and kicked the bucket” to mean “He filled the bucket and died.” Grotesque.
Click to expand...

I thought that was down right funny.


-T.
 
Dissenting Fears

Evidently, the dissenting justices fear that this may call into question existing gun control laws.

Hear, hear.

Let's do our best to realize their fears, shall we?

Call those laws into question.

And keep calling.
 
Ah, you heard El Neil Smith on Liberty Watch Radio, didn't you?
Click to expand...
No, I haven't!

I recently started referring to Richard J. Daley as "Papa Dick", Richard M. Daley as "Baby Dick" and the Chicago Police Department as les Tontons Macoutes. I'd NEVER heard ANYBODY make these references before!
 
But don't forget that gun control does work wonders in "gun free societies". compare Japans crime rate with the US and there is no comparison......the US crime rate is 6x greater.
Click to expand...
They also have "control" on certain other rights protected here by the 4th, 5th, and other Amendments. Those restrictions have far more crime-reduction effect. But I'm not willing to give those up either.
 
All this nonsensical celebration. They have said that we can own guns, but with reasonable restrictions. They will regulate us to death, to the point where it will be practically impossible to own or shoot our guns. They left the door open, and this is devistating to the 2A amendment. They make it seem like a good thing, that the 2A gives the individual the right to arm him/herself, but in reality, they will license us into oblivion. WE LOST.
 
HOORAY!!! :D

I just saw a CNN segment talking about it, and they went straight to internet sales about guns and the ruling. Their lackey claimed "internet sales are not monitored" and the internet sales "are more underground" and anyone can just buy a gun over the internet. I like how they failed to mention that all federal laws must be followed.
 
They left the door open, and this is devistating to the 2A amendment. They make it seem like a good thing, that the 2A gives the individual the right to arm him/herself, but in reality, they will license us into oblivion. WE LOST.
Click to expand...

I don't know if we lost, but I wouldn't call it a clear win either. The mayor of D.C. just came out and said he called the police department to get them to implement a licensing/registration procedure.

You can see where that is going. All of ten people in D.C. are going to be able to get licensed if it is up to the mayor.

Does that thought hold water or do you think all legally eligible potential gun owners will be able to own guns in D.C.?
 
You can see where that is going. All of ten people in D.C. are going to be able to get licensed if it is up to the mayor.
Click to expand...

The opinion strongly suggests that any requirements would need to be in line with "shall issue" laws. That is, unless the individual is prohibited (felon, minor, etc) they should be given a license. A law giving sole authority to the chief or mayor would invite arbitrary and capricious decisions and would be up for challenge. One step at a time.

On behalf of everybody here at REO Speedwagon, I would like to thank you for your support as we worked today to uphold the second amendment.
Click to expand...

Well that settles it, then.
 
I forgot to mention that this LEGITIMIZES ALL OF THE PREVIOUS BS LAWS that are in place.
Click to expand...

We can still work on the political front to eliminate those laws, and improve the ones we have now. Think of Heller as opening up a WESTERN FRONT to help relieve pressure on the Ostfront we've been slogging through all these long decades. The court won't "take Berlin" but it will doubtless help get us there in the end.
 
Fred40 said:
I'm all for gun ownership in the US....and I do own guns. We live in a gun society and banning gun ownership only leaves guns in the hands of criminals. While I whole heartedly believe in the 2nd A. and what the founding fathers intended I believe our society has moved way beyond that reality. A modern "militia" would stand absolutely NO CHANCE against US military forces......parity was lost a LONG time ago. So....protect yourself and your loved ones.....but the ability to overthrow our government (which was the founding fathers intentions...should the need arise) has long past.
Click to expand...
I respectfully disagree. To overthrow the government would be taking over Capitol Hill. This would be surprisingly easy. Who do you think would appose? The court members? Congress? None of them have guns that they could use in a moments notice. Yes, overthrowing Capitol Hill would be easy.


Ohhhhh, you mean our Military and NOT our Government don't you? Our Military and Government, while part of the same network, are mutually exclusive. Our Military is not the Government, and the Government is not the Military. Were we a Socialist nation where the two were one in the same, then I'd surmise the same thing you express.

In the worst case scenario anyhow, I don't believe the Military would use its "heavy" artillery on it's own land. We aren't WWII Russia and other Eastern Countries where "for the good of the people" means slaughtering their own people. I think our country is smarter than that.

Urban warfare would be more likely, with small arms being the norm. This would make the playing field more 'even' so to speak.

Also remember, members or our armed services are sworn to uphold the Constitution. There are extremes in every faction, but how many service men and women would really turn and fight against what they are sworn to uphold and protect?




On topic: Good news from SCOTUS for sure. Unfortunately, I'm stuck in Holland now so I've been refreshing this thread every 5 minutes waiting for updates lol.
 
I don't think it opens a front to fight unconsitutional legislation. They have said that these restrictions are ok.
 
I prefer the Flying Turkey Trot myownself...

Someone really needs to tell the nice folks in Washington that they've spent enough money, and that fighting to implement an oppressive, and probably racist, licensing system is not going to win them votes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
News Flash: The Constitution Means What It Says
Replies
5
Views
548
BigO01
B
C
  • Locked
For you 2A/Heller Philosophers...
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
mnrivrat
mnrivrat
U
  • Locked
Did SCOTUS decide on Carry?
Replies
4
Views
646
belercous
B
LiveLife
  • Locked
Effects of DC v Heller and subsequent case rulings on gun rights/modern firearms and accessories
Replies
1
Views
388
AlexanderA
A
Cavalier Knight
  • Locked
GOA Hits The Airwaves On Heller Decision
Replies
5
Views
481
SCKimberFan
S
Back
Top