BREAKING NEWS: DC Handgun Ban Overturned!

From somewhere else on the web:

Before anyone celebrates this as a victory, ask yourself why you need the government's permission (permit) in order to own a gun, if the supreme court said it is your RIGHT to own one.



thats exactly what i was thinking. Its great that they ruled this way but what if they have tougher ways to get permits and crap set as new add ons
 
Everyone needs to realize that this case was for a specific item. The Right for people in DC to own Hand Guns. Now I know many have pointed out the issues with 'Permits' I expect that groups will start to challenge these based on the SCOTUS decision soon. It may be another visit on the Issue to SCOTUS but this is a HUGE step for freedom. Lets take each and every victory as they come along, it may not be the final prize but puts a step closer.
 
No time to go through the whole thread or read up on it now, can someone tell me if SCOTUS put in their ruling any definitions with regard to which arms we can bear? In other words, did they apply any restrictions on any weapons, because if they made it a point to do that, then this isn't much of a victory, all it did was set a precedence for narrowing our ability to own what we want. If they didn't apply any definitions, then this is indeed another battle won for the people!
 
I am extremely pleased with this decision...but more work is needed. The constitution has been trampled on for many years now.
 
This is definitely a step in the right direction. We need to stay on this while the iron is hot.
 
From somewhere else on the web:


"This supreme court rulling is completely meaningless and will change nothing.

They ruled it is a citizen's RIGHT (not priviledge) to own and bear arms.

Yet if this rulling had any effect on actual laws, all gun permits and licenses would now be abolished, because you don't need the government's permit or license in order to excersise a true RIGHT.

Permits and licenses are for priveledges, such as driving an automobile or operating your Ham radios.

Before anyone celebrates this as a victory, ask yourself why you need the government's permission (permit) in order to own a gun, if the supreme court said it is your RIGHT to own one.

It would be like saying you have the right to free speech or to vote, and need a permit or license in order to exercise those rights.

So long as a permit or license is required in order to own a gun, the government (and supreme court) really is saying it is NOT a right, even if the Constitution says it is.

And in the real world, it doesn't matter what the Constitution says, but what your local police officer says.

Until the supreme court rules that it is unconstitutional for the federal, state or local governments to require permits (government permission) to own a gun, the supream court is a farce that doesn't understand the difference between a RIGHT and a government allowed PRIVELEDGE."

Well if it's "completely meaningless" then why all of the MSM hub bub, going ballistic and fuss about it? :D

Why did the SCOTUS even bother ruling? ;)
 
Last edited:
Alito and Roberts were the onyl good thing Bush has done.

I would disagree with your sentiment somewhat... he has done a lot of good vetos in the last couple months... maybe we should have had a democratic congress on along... we might not be in Iraq and the he would have vetod all the riducous law instead of signed them. (Cap & Trade, Windfall Profits, $300B mortgage bailout, farm bill).
 
I want to know what was stuffed in this ruling that will end up screwing our liberties over though, there is always SOMETHING they stuff into a ruling that then makes it even harder for us later on...... Optimistic always but realistic still the same.
 
A step in the right direction.

But how long until D.C. rewrites their law to the point that the only allowed "hand gun" shoots paint balls?

"You can defend yourself, just aim for the perpetrator's eye!"
 
The fact that it was 5-4 is frightening though. Should have been 9-0.
 
Back
Top