.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Friday, June 27, 2008

Supreme Court: Heller Affirmed

Woooooooooooooooooo Hoooooooooooooooooooo! The Supreme Court hit one out of the ballpark on their Second Amendment ruling in District of Columbia v Heller.

From AFP:

    The US Supreme Court ruled Thursday that individual Americans have a constitutional right to bear arms, ending a ban on owning handguns in the capital in its first ruling on gun rights in 70 years.

    The court's 5-4 landmark decision -- on whether the right to keep and bear arms is an individual or collective right -- said the city's law violated the second amendment of the US constitution which the justices said guaranteed citizens the right to keep guns at home for self-defense.

    "There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the second amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms," wrote Justice Antonin Scalia in the court's decision.

    He added the court took seriously the problem of handgun violence in cities like Washington and said there were "a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns."

    "The enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," the court ruled.

    [...]

    The ruling was a victory for gun rights advocates, but gun control proponents said it would help their cause by endorsing the regulation of firearms.

    The high court had never before issued a precise ruling on the interpretation of the second amendment, which states: "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."

    Washington, home to the White House and the US administration, has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country.

    Private possession of handguns is strictly banned here, and any rifles or shotguns must be kept unloaded in homes or under a trigger lock.

    City officials argued the ban, instituted in 1976, was necessary to stem rising gun violence, and that the second amendment protected gun rights for people associated with militias, not individuals.

    The case, District of Columbia vs. Heller, was originally brought in 2003 by a federal building guard who carries a handgun on duty and wanted to keep it in his home for self-defense.



The SCOTUS ruling has the gun control crowd howling like the Moonbats they are. NY Times:

    Gun-control advocates across the country reacted with shock and outrage at the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns today, saying the ruling would threaten gun-control measures in other states.

    [...]

    In Chicago, Mayor Richard M. Daley, a staunch supporter of gun control, called the decision “frightening”[.]

    [...]

    Senator Dianne Feinstein, a former mayor of San Francisco, which also restricts the owning of guns, reacted strongly to the ruling, saying she was “viscerally affected” by it and worried for the nation’s safety.

    [...]

    “Unlike the elitist view that believes Americans cling to guns out of bitterness, today’s ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right — sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly,” [Republican Senator and Presidential Candidate John McCain] said.

    [...]

    [Barack Hussein Obama said], "I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms[.]" [ He is lying! - Drake ]

Huh, those are strange words coming from The Meccachurian Candidate, considering his past record and statements on the Second Amendment. On The Issues:

    Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. Obama responded, "No, my writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns." [ Oh yes he has! - Drake ]

    Actually, Obama's writing was on the 1996 document, which was filed when Obama was running for the Illinois state Senate. A Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois, had this question, and Obama took hard line:

    35. Do you support state legislation to:
    a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.

    [...]

    [In Year] 2000: [Obama] cosponsored [a] bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month:

    Obama sought moderate gun control measures, such as a 2000 bill he cosponsored to limit handgun purchases to one per month (it did not pass). He voted against letting people violate local weapons bans in cases of self-defense[.]

    [...]

    Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:

    * Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
    * Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.

Banning the sale or transfer of ALL forms of semi-automatic weapons would leave us with only revolvers and single shot shotguns and rifles...until, of course, The Liberals took them away from us.

A semi-automatic weapon IS NOT a weapon where you pull the trigger once and it continually spits out bullets until the clip is empty. Liberals would like for you to believe that this is what meant by the term semi-automatic, but it most definitely is not.


It is also interesting to note that Diane Whinestein is a rabid anti-Second Amendment politician but who has her own permit to carry a concealed handgun for her protection. . Oh, she may claim she no longer does this, but you know what - I don't believe her, not one bit. So it is quite entertaining to ponder that Whinestein allows herself the privilege of defending herself, but does not think that "the common people" should be entitled to do the same. Whinestein also is malignantly clueless when it comes to handling and holding an "assault weapon".

And the American Public Health Association (APHA) is gravely disappointed by [Thursday's] Supreme Court ruling against the District of Columbia's gun restrictions. Awwwwwww. "Dat's.So.Sad!" Quick, someone get me another box of Kleenex!

The SCOTUS ruling was SPOT ON! Go outside, point your rifles, shotguns and handguns toward the sky, and fire off a couple rounds of celebratory shots. I mean this strictly in the figurative sense.


©2008

Other fine writing about The Supreme Court Decision and Heller v District of Columbia:

David Codrea at The War On Guns: Heller Affirmed
Kevin at Smallest Minority: Heller Affirmed
Mr. Completely: Heller Affirmed...Good News, Sorta
Swampie at Nukes News And Views: Heller Affirmed
Steamdragon at Thus I Have Spoke: Heller Affirmed
Mark at Chester Street: Welcome To DC!
Denny at New Republican Party Blog: Supreme Court Ruling Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban

Labels: , ,


Comments:
In other related news, the right to bear arms has now been extended to apes and gorillas. Best not be no man punks round here. Dr. Zeus gonna bust a cap in your opposable thumb having ass.
 
Dr. Zeus bust a cap. Oh...there's a photoshop in there somewhere.

As soon as an Ape can go to work for me and bring ME the paycheck while I stay home or at the golf course, I'll be all for it.
 
Thanks for the plug.
 
That would be slavery DD!!

Oh and I would like to drag out my 357 Mag and say...

Boom! Fuckin' Boom! Boom!!!

This is something to celebrate!

"Gun-control advocates across the country reacted with shock and outrage at the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns today, saying the ruling would threaten gun-control measures in other states."

I heard an NRA spokesman say it out-right, they are planning to go after other bans in other states.
 
You're welcome Denny. My pleasure.
 
Arc -

Yeah, I heard the same about the NRA going after bans in other cities and states. This is fantastic news!

Boom! Fuckin! Boom! Boom! Indeed!
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

eXTReMe Tracker



Web Site Traffic Counters
Alabama Internet

Listed on BlogShares

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

This site uses photographs and material from other sources in strict
accordance and compliance with Fair Use Section 107 U.S. Copyright Code.
All other images and content © 2005-2009 David Drake.
Not responsible for content contained at linked sites.

Policy on commenting:
- Anonymous comments have little chance of being published.
- Comments made on posts 60 days old or older have little chance of being published.
- Published comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog author.
- Discretion of publishing or rejecting submitted comments rests solely with the owner and creator of this blog.
- Comments that egregiously "plug" (i.e. advertise or promote) another site or blog will be rejected. This doesn't mean you cannot include a link to your story, blog or to another site, but don't go overboard.
- Profanity is not a disqualifying factor, but profane rants solely for purposes of profanity are unlikely to be published.
- The owner and creator of this blog is not liable or responsible for the opinions of those who comment.