A way to prevent incorporation of the Second Amendment against the states?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0801edit1aug01,0,1174999.story
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0801edit1aug01,0,1174999.story
'Oh, because the Supreme Court's done it we're just gonna dismiss it and all of a sudden people can arm themselves
That is my concern as well. I'd like to see incorporation determined once and for all.A way to prevent incorporation of the Second Amendment against the states?
Ah, yes. The delight of imposing restrictions on rights.But that means there's still likely to be ways for state and local governments to impose reasonable restrictions on the sale and ownership of firearms that don't rise to a complete ban on possession.
Though no chance of actually protecting victims from criminals...Such measures will have a decent chance of passing legal muster
It's great to have self-protection legitimized as a purpose for having guns. Thank you Heller.—if they are designed to ensure that firearms are permitted only to those who can use them safely for sport and for self-protection.
Suggests that they are doubtful. Good.The Supreme Court said a requirement that a lawful firearm in the home must be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock is unconstitutional unless it contains a provision that allows for self-defense. The courts will determine if the new Washington law goes far enough in protecting that right.
"Hint-hint. Here's what we suggest." --Chicago TribuneSome gun advocates also accuse D.C. officials of concocting a cumbersome process to discourage gun ownership. Those officials have hinted that the city's gun registration bureaucracy could be grindingly slow. Chicago already knows how to play that game.
On the other hand, if everybody backs down for fear of incorporation, doesn't that achieve the same end? We can always file if one city is bold enough.I'd like to see incorporation determined once and for all.
It was based on flawed legal reasoning, ignored precedent and will lead to years of litigation about the constitutionality of various firearms restrictions.
Won't happen. This is Chicago. They love Daley. He's Mayor for life, or as long as he wants it.Their jobs! They should be removed from office!
...ignored...precedent...
Such measures will have a decent chance of passing legal muster—if they are designed to ensure that firearms are permitted only to those who can use them safely for sport and for self-protection
Daley's whole anti-crime campaign is BS to keep getting him elected. Chicago PD is far too busy collecting graft from bar-owners (to ignore the fact that they ignore Fire Code capacity limits every night), and far too busy rousting drunken Yuppies and suburban college kids on Division.
One night, my pizza guy was mugged right in front of my building. The doorman looked on and did nothing. I admonished him for not calling 911. I saw cars being broken into all the time. I saw smash and grabs being perpetrated on store-fronts in Lincoln Park. While I was there, a rape was committed on an El platform, while a bunch of commuters looked on. Nobody lifted a finger to help, or to call a cop. One Tue. afternoon, I called 911 to report a crime in progress. Nobody answered the damned phone!