Supreme Court posed to back right to bear arms

[phill4paul]

on Drudge:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/51ca64b6-f51d-11dc-a21b-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1

 

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

i listened to the debates earlier and guys, i gotta admin, i breathed a faint sigh of relief. i was actually some what suprised with some of the more conservative responses and emailed a few of them to let them know their arguments were appeciated by those of us who weren't able to speak.

 

[Strike-Fighter]

Has anyone recorded the arguments?

 

[dircha]

Has anyone recorded the arguments?

On http://www.cspan.org/

rtsp://video.c-span.org/archive/sc/sc031808_2amendment.rm

 

[Strike-Fighter]

many thanks.. er... how does this rtsp business work? O_O

 

[OddballAZ]

I listened to it. It sounds pretty good. Sounds like Roberts, Alito, Kennedy and Scalia understand why we have the 2nd Amendment. I didn't hear Thomas at all but he is a strict Constitutionalist like Scalia. Even some of the libs on the court sounded like the ban may be excessive.

 

[american.swan]

many thanks.. er... how does this rtsp business work? O_O

You need realplayer or something that plays realplayer streems

 

[american.swan]

This is the first Supreme Court tape I have ever heard and it sounds to me like they argued with the DC lawyer trying to get him to agree that it's a personal right....

Then they argued with the Heller lawyer on how to "secure" the weapon correctly.

Very strange.

 

[JWZguy]

These guys are infuriating when they talk about machine guns.

So the government makes it ridiculously expensive to legally own a machine gun, not to mention hazardous to your health and your kittens via the rabid dogs allowed to "tax" them, and then they say "well, we'd never argue that machine guns would be reasonable for civilians to keep because there are only 160,000 of them in the country." ?

RARGH. Give me a break!

Some of the judges (I can't tell which ones by voice) sound like they are much more concerned with defending the 2nd amendment than the lawyers who are supposed to be fighting for it.

 

[Doktor_Jeep]

I listened to it. It sounds pretty good. Sounds like Roberts, Alito, Kennedy and Scalia understand why we have the 2nd Amendment. I didn't hear Thomas at all but he is a strict Constitutionalist like Scalia. Even some of the libs on the court sounded like the ban may be excessive.

DO NOT be fooled.

Think for a moment. Why would they speak favorably of 2A now?

Yet do you see anything substantial coming from this? Are all those infringing state laws being knocked down right now?

This is a trick to lull us into a sense of false security. It's that same false security that had conservatives sleeping for 6 of the last 7 years and allowed the neocons to take over.


SCOTUS will come up with something that only looks favorable yet it will amount to letting states remain in the status quo. The government media complex will make it look like a victory for 2A but what gets down on paper, and what gets challenged by government actions, will be under the radar. And it's not like the government obeys it's own laws anyway.

Think. Why this NOW? Why after 200 years? Why at the same time the Leviathan's dark heart, the monetary system, is collapsing? Why at the same time when the corruption and tyranny is so transparent?

Nothing changes. The only reason why there is no disarmament is because the lack the manpower (so far) and we promise an insurrection if they ever dare to demand a turn-in.

 

[acptulsa]

I heard some scoffing at the idea that it was still necessary for us to be able to have guns to feed and protect ourselves.

I didn't like it.

 

[Deborah K]

This is the first Supreme Court tape I have ever heard and it sounds to me like they argued with the DC lawyer trying to get him to agree that it's a personal right....

Then they argued with the Heller lawyer on how to "secure" the weapon correctly.

Very strange.

What I don't get is WHY they would have to point out to a supposed "Constitutional Attorney" that an amendment within the Bill of Rights is anything OTHER than a personal right. The point of the Bill of Rights is to protect the individual from the government.

Also, this nonsense about using long arms for self defense, long arms are offensive weapons. Side arms are for the purpose of self defense.

Mind boggling.

 

[Dr.3D]

Also, this nonsense about using long arms for self defense, long arms are offensive weapons. Side arms are for the purpose of self defense.

Mind boggling.

Long arms are useful for self defense against those who would be using long arms as an offensive weapon.

 

[hillertexas]

I listened to the recording as well. When the female justice asked "With all of the crime in DC, why is it unreasonable to have a handgun ban?" I wish someone would have said "because criminals do not obey the law, thus gun control laws only restrict the law abiding citizen."

 

[Maz2331]

That's What They Do

This is the first Supreme Court tape I have ever heard and it sounds to me like they argued with the DC lawyer trying to get him to agree that it's a personal right....

Then they argued with the Heller lawyer on how to "secure" the weapon correctly.

Very strange.

the Justices usually ping both sides pretty hard to see what positions they can "shake", plus you have the Liberals (Souter, Ginsberg, Stevens) who will try to find something to support thier position and hit Heller's attorney, while the Conservatives (Roberts, Kennedy, Scalia) smacked around DC's lawyer.

What I found interesting is that the DC lawyer really got backed into several corners and made self-contradictory arguments.

Don't read anything into not hearing Justice Thomas. He doesn't usually ever talk during oral arguments - he just listens and then slams someone hard in the final ruling.

And, Chief Justice Roberts has been very much opposed to making overly sweeping rulings or applying balancing tests. He'll try to keep the ruling as narrow as possible, though he may get out voted.

What really impressed me was Justice Kennedy. He was the wildcard, and he seems really strongly on the pro-2A side of the argument.

The DC ban (and any other ones) will be gone, and 2A upheld as an individual right. The only question is how far the court will allow regulations to go before being considered invalid.

 

[hillertexas]

What I found interesting is that the DC lawyer really got backed into several corners and made self-contradictory arguments.

+1
He argued that the right to bear arms was the right of his definition of militia when it came to the 2nd amendment (collective interpretation). But when he was arguing his case about the DC gun ban specifically, his defense was essentially "but the people can have rifles"... implying that the 2nd amendment refers to the people (individualistic interpretation).

What a schmuck.

 

[Deborah K]

Long arms are useful for self defense against those who would be using long arms as an offensive weapon.

True, but I'm referring to the context of the argument that long arms are legal in D.C. and therefore there is no need for hand guns.

 

[Dr.3D]

True, but I'm referring to the context of the argument that long arms are legal in D.C. and therefore there is no need for hand guns.

True, it is very had to conceal a long arm, and thus it would be pointless to have one to carry for self defense. They are also very hard to maneuver in close quarters situations and thus a poor defense against someone with a pistol.

 

[Deborah K]

True, it is very had to conceal a long arm, and thus it would be pointless to have one to carry for self defense. They are also very hard to maneuver in close quarters situations and thus a poor defense against someone with a pistol.

You make good points.

 

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

True, but I'm referring to the context of the argument that long arms are legal in D.C. and therefore there is no need for hand guns.

i know lol! how much sense does this make? i wonder if (when it was passed) the long guns were used as a bargaining chip. "...well if you give us the hand guns, you can keep the long guns.." sorta thing... just speculation...