Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Supreme Court rules on DC handgun ban  (Read 696 times)
Valekhai
Ranter Level 3
***

Karma: 8
Posts: 203



View Profile
« on: June 26, 2008, 10:38:38 AM »

Supreme Court Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban, Upholds Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

I'm a happy man today.  It'll be interesting to see how far-reaching the results of this ruling will be.  Hopefully Chicago will be forced to change some of it's laws.
Logged

"Until you find something to fight for, you settle for something to fight against."

"Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding."

"You can see why Che ducked out right after the revolution. It’s a lot easier to blow up trains than to make them run on time."
Tych0
Ranter Level 3
***

Karma: 9
Posts: 245


There is no spoon.


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 26, 2008, 01:46:03 PM »

Good to hear about DC, but I highly doubt Chicago's going to change its gun laws any time soon. The politics in this city are too deeply entrenched. I mean, you can't even legally own a pellet gun this city (although I've heard people shooting off AKs in the middle of the night before). If handguns are illegal in Chicago, how come the majority of the gun crimes committed in this city are with handguns? Wow that's some effective legislation you guys got there  Roll Eyes

Now they're trying to give the cops assault rifles to counteract the flow of black market assault weapons. Sounds like corruption to me! Where's Batman when you need him?
Oh server I gotta get outta this city...
Logged

"A good horse that follows others.
          Awareness of danger,
          With perseverance, furthers.
          Practice chariot driving and armed defense daily.
          It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
     -I Ching, Hexagram 26
hatterofmaddnesz
Ranter Level 4
****

Karma: 33
Posts: 333


To Much Mercury


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 26, 2008, 01:53:05 PM »

Yeah I just read the news, a very close decision.  I'm glad it passed the way it did, and I liked what the majority had to say about it.  I didn't really understand some of the dissenter's arguments, coming from the side that it is for a "well regulated militia."  My question to them would be, how do become or form a militia without guns?  Without guns, your not going to be much help in defending the country.  I always thought, and please correct me if I'm wrong or through in your two cents, but being militia was kinda like being Wog.  You just kinda decide to be militia.  No one can tell you your militia, it's more of a personal choice.
Logged

I'd Rather Have It And Not Need It Than Need It And Not Have It
hatterofmaddnesz
Valekhai
Ranter Level 3
***

Karma: 8
Posts: 203



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2008, 03:00:45 PM »

Good to hear about DC, but I highly doubt Chicago's going to change its gun laws any time soon. The politics in this city are too deeply entrenched. I mean, you can't even legally own a pellet gun this city (although I've heard people shooting off AKs in the middle of the night before). If handguns are illegal in Chicago, how come the majority of the gun crimes committed in this city are with handguns? Wow that's some effective legislation you guys got there  Roll Eyes
My hopes really aren't that high.  I see hefty licensing fees and registration on the horizon.  But the decision is still a step in the right direction.  I'm mostly happy about the court ruling that it's an individual.  Now when I'm debating gun control with people I can put to bed that ridiculous argument that "militia" means "National Guard."
And yeah, Daley is an idiot.  He seems to be leaping at every chance to prove that today whenever he talks about the ruling.  Apparently we're now on the path to becoming "the wild west" all over again, and all personal arguments are going to end in gunfights.  What a douche.  I'm glad I don't live in the city, or in Cook county.  Actually, I'm not thrilled with Illinois in general.  It pisses me off that one city holds so much sway over an entire state.
Logged

"Until you find something to fight for, you settle for something to fight against."

"Criminals thrive on the indulgence of society's understanding."

"You can see why Che ducked out right after the revolution. It’s a lot easier to blow up trains than to make them run on time."
Saigh
Ranter Level 2
**

Karma: 18
Posts: 80


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2008, 03:47:42 PM »

Wow.  I'm glad the ban went down, but I find the whole idea of banning carry or possession of handguns just really bizarre.  I'm starting to see why people so often assume my state is not actually part of the U.S.A. - there's a pretty substansial cultural gap, and things like this just highlight it further.  I'm glad to see that the decision went the way it did, but was anyone else creeped out by some of the dissenting statements?  Also, the assurance of the authorities that "no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense" was just bizarre.  Either it's a valid law that needs to be enforced (you, know, like a law), or if violating it is not a crime, then remove it from the damn books.  If it's enforced selectively, then it seems more like a tool of harassment than an actual method of protecting the citizenry.  Augh.
Logged

Alas! they had been friends in youth;
But whispering tongues can poison truth;
And constancy lives in realms above;
And life is thorny; and youth is vain;
And to be wroth with one we love
Doth work like madness in the brain.

Coleridge "Christabel" lines 408-13
hatterofmaddnesz
Ranter Level 4
****

Karma: 33
Posts: 333


To Much Mercury


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2008, 08:24:54 PM »

Also, the assurance of the authorities that "no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense" was just bizarre.  Either it's a valid law that needs to be enforced (you, know, like a law), or if violating it is not a crime, then remove it from the damn books.  If it's enforced selectively, then it seems more like a tool of harassment than an actual method of protecting the citizenry.  Augh.

Totally.  The best way to sum it up is that gravity is a law, it doesn't pick and choose what it will and will not affect.

If you selectively enforce something, then it's not a law.  This is where police get the idea that they are somehow involved in the decision making process instead of realizing they are at the bottom of the legal system, they are merely the enforcers.
Logged

I'd Rather Have It And Not Need It Than Need It And Not Have It
hatterofmaddnesz
avagdu
Ranter Level 5
*****

Karma: 78
Posts: 1483


Son Of Liberty


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 27, 2008, 09:30:15 PM »

If you have to ask permission it's a privilege, not a right..

http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2008/06/26/second-amendment-right-partially-upheld/
Logged

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

| agorism.info | r4nger5blog.tk | individualism & sovereignty
destined
Ranter Level 5
*****

Karma: 8
Posts: 572


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: July 02, 2008, 04:36:44 AM »

Why do I expect another million more lawsuits before this decision will come up in the next 20 years again with a new interpretation?
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to: