1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Supreme Court doesn't take DC Gun Case today

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by 100straight, Nov 13, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 100straight

    100straight Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    584
    U.S. Supreme Court ignores gun cases

    Published: Nov. 13, 2007 at 11:06 AM

    WASHINGTON, Nov. 13 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court declined to tinker with the Second Amendment, ignoring petitions from the District of Columbia on its Tuesday orders list.

    The court didn't explain its decision but Scotusblog reported justices may want more time to consider the petitions or reworking the questions it is willing to review.

    The District wants the court to determine how the Second Amendment should be defined (District of Columbia vs. Heller) and a cross petition seeks a ruling on who can challenge laws before they are actively enforced (Parker vs. District of Columbia). The justices are expected to look at the cases again next week.
     
  2. k1200ltc509

    k1200ltc509 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    825
    Wow, but I haven't seen a lot about THIS on the media quite yet! I wonder if they are rethinking this appeal. I know that the fight will and must go on, and that the Sup. Court has several options with this appeal from DC. But I guess that I can hope that the Court will not hear the issue, and it will become the law of that district. Then go after all of the cities that are lost and try and take them back from the Goblins... I hope that is the way it plays out. Rick Gibbs
     
  3. Shooting Coach

    Shooting Coach Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    8,351
    Location:
    Nashville Tn
    What Rick said.
     
  4. Beancounter

    Beancounter TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    482
    Being a gambler, I would rather get it out there right here, right now. We are being bled to death the way things are. Anti's say gun ownership is not an individual right and we say it is. It is way past time to call the hand. The next administration could be just like the previous Clinton admin and start pounding on us again. The next administration could appoint more liberal judges. Next election could cost us a lot of the second ammendment. So I say - get it going now. Take back our rights.
     
  5. jackmitch

    jackmitch TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    815
    yeah havegun very well said. are running for pres. you get my vote today.
     
  6. starshot2b

    starshot2b TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    704
    It isn't over yet.... "The next time the court could announce its decision about hearing the case is Nov. 26..."

    Stay tuned.
     
  7. Porcupine

    Porcupine Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,006
    Location:
    South Central Massachusetts
    I agree with HaveGun. We're not going to have a chance like this for a long time to come. I think there's a good chance that a Supreme Court decision would be in our favor. Go for it.

    Porcupine
     
  8. k1200ltc509

    k1200ltc509 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    825
    Coach, this is a very passionate subject for me. I am like you, like everyone else. I am just a "gunowner"! Not gunnut or someone that would abuse a firearm. I am just a male with a military background, enlisted when I was 17. After my tour like another 28 more years in uniform, in law enforcement. Training others in the safe, lawful use of firearms. Now coach of our SCTP team after retirement.

    I am college educated, responsible, and have never even thought of using a firearm of any type to violate a law. But it really pissed me off when an attractive young lady in Washington DC, (a woman of color also) told me I had to get out of town before dark or "they will shoot you guys!" My nations capitol and I cannot walk around it after dark? But what about The Ban on any firearms?

    I, along with probably 99% of uniform officers don't care the slightest bit that responsible, and law abiding people would carry or posess firearms. It does upset me when King Richard of the State of Chicago tries to dictate that I can and cannot have a firearm for whatever lawful reason that I might want, use, posess or just even look at the darn thing and admire it's craftsmanship!

    Chicago is just another city that has become "Indian Country" if you get my meaning. It's out of control, and until people get tired of being victims and allow the proper authorities to take back their neighborhoods it will get worse and worse. It sounds like it that the residents of those 'hoods are the ones that are shooting each other, and making the good residents prisoners in their own homes. So king Richard don't take away my freedoms, stop worrying about the freaking olympics and try to solve the real problems of your city.
    Just enforce the laws on the books which you failed to do for so long from the time that you were the States Attorney when you looked the other way during police torture and misconduct. Rest assured that I won't be coming into your city with my guns, to do any drive-bys or armed robberies in your city!

    I would like the Supremes to take on the issue right now, to put it to rest and recognize the 2nd amendmant as it should be. Deal with it Jesse Jackson, Father Pflegler and others and really try to come up with a solution to the problems, and not infringe on my rights. Sorry to be on a soapbox, but this issue is important to me and a whole lot of others besides the Goblins as the Colonel so aptly named them. I don't want my grandkids to have to see guns displayed in a museum as their only exposure to a gun. RLG
     
  9. Steve-CT

    Steve-CT TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    524
    There should be no debate. The Second Amendment IS AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT as well as a collective right. If it weren't an individual right, it would not have been included in the BILL OF RIGHTS; if it weren't an individual right, the Founding Fathers would not have recorded dozens of comments and statements and opinions about the individual citizen's rights to own firearms, be proficient marksman and be able to defend his own homestead as well the homeland; there wouldn't have been a series of Federalist papers written prior to the Constitution that included the right to bear arms.

    Anyone who doesn't agree with this and works to overturn or warp its meaning isn't a Constitutional American.

    PERIOD
     
  10. Steve-CT

    Steve-CT TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    524
    There should be no debate. The Second Amendment IS AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT as well as a collective right. If it weren't an individual right, it would not have been included in the BILL OF RIGHTS; if it weren't an individual right, the Founding Fathers would not have recorded dozens of comments and statements and opinions about the individual citizen's rights to own firearms, be proficient marksman and be able to defend his own homestead as well the homeland; there wouldn't have been a series of Federalist papers written prior to the Constitution that included the right to bear arms.

    Anyone who doesn't agree with this and works to overturn or warp its meaning isn't a Constitutional American.

    PERIOD
     
  11. Doctor_Chicago

    Doctor_Chicago Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    209
    Location:
    Chicago and Cleveland
    The next time for the Supreme Court to make an announcement on this matter, will either be November 20th, or November 26th, 2007.
     
  12. Wilma Harris

    Wilma Harris TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    188
    I hope they take the question. Like it or not, our next President will be anti-gun. With a Democrat controled House and Senate combined with an anti-gun President, we need the Supreme Court to rule in favor of individual rights. Obviously we don't know if they will or not, but if they do not make any ruling at all, I fear gun owners are in deep pooky. At least on a yes or no basis, we have a 50/50 chance of them making the correct favorable decision.
     
  13. Hipshot 3

    Hipshot 3 TS Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,796
    Ditto what Stevel-ct said!
     
  14. k1200ltc509

    k1200ltc509 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    825
    Southbend if they don't take the case is fine with me. That would mean that the court will let stand the reversal of the DC ban, which is what the original suit is about. If that happens the dominoes would start to fall! And any one individual group that wanted to sue a form of government would just be able to point to the reversal of the appelate court and cite it in their lawsuit against Chicago, Cinncy, MOrton Grove etc.

    I'm thinking and hoping that the Supremes will not grant a hearing and let the Appellate decision stand. Good for you and me! Rick Gibbs
     
  15. gdbabin

    gdbabin TS Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,461
    Just to speculate if I may,

    I wonder what it would take for us gun owners to become classified as a militia? The argument seems to revolve around whether the 2nd amendment applies to individuals, and/or just militias. If they take away the individual aspect of ownership, we'll need an alternative...

    Guy Babin
     
  16. Wilma Harris

    Wilma Harris TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    188
    k1200ltc509, which way do you want it? In your first post you said, " But I guess that I can hope that the Court will not hear the issue, and it will become the law of that district."

    In your second post on this thread you then stated, "I would like the Supremes to take on the issue right now, to put it to rest and recognize the 2nd amendmant as it should be."

    Then in your third post you said, "Southbend if they don't take the case is fine with me."

    You seem to be flip-floping back and forth on if you want the Supreme Court to hear the issue or not.

    I think the risk is too high that the next appointee to the Court will be made by an antigun President and it could well be a replacement for a conservative Justice. Like you I am real nervous of the outcome because this is a very important subject to me, but I believe now might be better than later. You can bet if the Courts makup were to become decidedly liberal, the Democrats would push until they got a case before them.
     
  17. k1200ltc509

    k1200ltc509 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    825
    Southbend I don't know if you thought I was dissing you or what that was not my intention. There is no flip flopping on my part. I remain an absolute supporter of our Rights. Hmm, I see where that you might intrepet some flipflopping but that wasn't my intent!

    By misconstruing the word take you might think that I am waffling on my decision. they have several options here, and I (and this is only my opinion!) believe that they won't vote to "take" the case. Hence that reversal of that appellate court would become the law or rule of law for that district.

    So no there is no flipping or flopping on my part at all. Rick Gibbs
     
  18. 100straight

    100straight Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    584
    I'm thinking they almost have to take the case. Why? Because the SC rarely allows differing opinions to exist in different districts, especially when it concerns Constitutional precedent. If they leave it alone there will be a different set of rules in the DC Circuit compared to the 9th Circuit. The DC Circuit has ruled the 2nd Amendment to be an individual right, but the 9th is very liberal and no doubt views it as a right held by police and militia only. The SC doesn't want such a difference to exist, so traditionally they have settled such issues. Let's hope they get it right.

    Shoot well and often,

    Mark.
     
  19. flylta

    flylta TS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    256
    I feel sorry for the guy that tries to collect all the guns. How many do you think it would take? How fast can you reload?
     
  20. Gary Waalkes

    Gary Waalkes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,398
    flyIta, I guess you don't remember the lines of people in Australia "turning 'em in". Nobody shot the Mounties in Canada either. I don't know of anyone who stood up in Great Britain. Let's get that ruling now! Besides confirming our basic freedoms, it would also serve to flush out the anti gunner politicians. They would actually have to take a public stand on the issue.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.