Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban - The Firearms Forum

CMfromIL · 06-28-2010, 09:35 AM

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2821015920100628

Quote:

The ruling, issued on the last day of the Supreme Court's term, was a victory for four Chicago-area residents, two gun rights groups and the politically powerful National Rifle Association.

It was a defeat for Chicago, which defended its law as a reasonable exercise of local power to protect public safety. The law and a similar handgun ban in suburban Oak Park, Illinois, were the nation's most restrictive gun control measures.

This is a good thing!

rentalguy1 · 06-28-2010, 09:42 AM

5-4 split as expected. I wonder if this could be used in my home state to turn over bans on legal concealed carry in publicly funded places, such as city parks?

red14 · 06-28-2010, 09:57 AM

This is great news, especially for Chicago
and it's #1 gun hater.

Insulation Tim · 06-28-2010, 09:59 AM

What concerns me the most about the present Supreme Court is that it appears that the justices vote along party lines or ideaology rather than a legal scholarship interpretation of the Constitution.

As noted above, it was the typical 5:4 split and my guess is that the "5" are always the same "5" and the "4" are always the same "4".

lawdawg · 06-28-2010, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Insulation Tim

What concerns me the most about the present Supreme Court is that it appears that the justices vote along party lines or ideaology rather than a legal scholarship interpretation of the Constitution.

As noted above, it was the typical 5:4 split and my guess is that the "5" are always the same "5" and the "4" are always the same "4".

Kinda scary when you realize who is in the White House now to nominate new Supreme Court Justices, and who is in Congress to confirm them. And how many may be appointed in the coming years.

wpage · 06-28-2010, 11:15 AM

Elena Kagan will throw that vote the other way...
Once she gets the nod.

rglbegl · 06-28-2010, 11:37 AM

5-4 is BS!!!!

The U.S. supreme court has 4 members that voted against the U.S. Constitution!!!!!
I know there is a little more to it than that, but when it boils down, that is what happened.

Big ugly · 06-28-2010, 12:30 PM

The supreme court is just as bad as the other branches of government. The supreme court should be free of political and party ties and base their decisions on no bias political BS. Unfortunately our government is so corupt they cant see past their own pockets.

durk · 06-28-2010, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big ugly

The supreme court is just as bad as the other branches of government. The supreme court should be free of political and party ties and base their decisions on no bias political BS. Unfortunately our government is so corupt they cant see past their own pockets.

+1 Should have been 9 - 0

hogger129 · 06-28-2010, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Paul Helmke of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence said, "We can expect two things as a result of today's decision ... the gun lobby and gun criminals will use it to try to strike down gun laws, and those legal challenges will continue to fail."

How dumb is this guy, honestly? Why would "gun criminals" try to go around a law? Isn't that the definition of a criminal? One who doesn't follow the law?

Quote:

"Those legal challenges will continue to fail..."

Yeah, okay. That's why the Supreme Court struck down the ban in DC. That must be why more and more states have been not only striking down gun bans, but handing out permits to carry.

hogger129 · 06-28-2010, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rglbegl

5-4 is BS!!!!

The U.S. supreme court has 4 members that voted against the U.S. Constitution!!!!!
I know there is a little more to it than that, but when it boils down, that is what happened.

Yeah it's pretty sad isn't it?

Prizefighter · 06-28-2010, 02:21 PM

Excellent. I figured this was the way it would go, but there's always a nagging worry.

I hope Chigago residents are on their way to shops and ranges this week to celebrate.

Marlin · 06-28-2010, 04:19 PM

If anyone should like to read the entire opinion of the Supreme Court in McDonald vs Chicago, here it is:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

rglbegl · 06-28-2010, 04:35 PM

Video by National Shooting Sports Foundation President Steve Sanetti

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9iXN...layer_embedded

Jim K · 06-28-2010, 04:39 PM

Kagan is replacing Stevens, one of the so-called "liberal" justices, so the balance on the court will not change. If Obama gets a chance to appoint another justice, the balance will shift dramatically with 5 left wing justices who believe, as Kagan does, that the Constitution is play-dough to be molded any way the SC "progressives" want.

Jim

Bobitis · 06-28-2010, 06:09 PM

In the State of Washington, all judicial appointments are 'non-partisan'.

So where does politics and feel good measures enter the debate? The SCotUS should be intrepreting law. There is no room for personal idealism.

Or did I miss something again? Seems like I've been doing a lot of that lately.

The Amendments to the Constitution read clear as day to me. I see little or no ambiguity in any of them. The wording of the 1st and 2nd is constructed in a way that there should be no doubt to their intent. When the framers wrote this document, they did in a way that may be scrutinized, yet would be unrefuteable.

When they wrote about the right to bear arms, I don't think they were referring to big nasty omnivores and people with a couple limbs attached to their torso.

Interesting antonyms:

Right vs Gift
Right vs Left
Right vs Wrong

A Gift from the Left is Wrong.

papawed · 06-28-2010, 07:15 PM

I am not a lawyer. I think this is a huge precedent for the right to keep and bear arms.

Someone with a legal background, please interput this ruling, and tell us what it means for our future continued right.

This may be the best thing that has happened since "the Obama change" started". I'll bet he is not happy.

Bobitis · 06-28-2010, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papawed

I am not a lawyer. I think this is a huge precedent for the right to keep and bear arms.

Someone with a legal background, please interput this ruling, and tell us what it means for our future continued right.

This may be the best thing that has happened since "the Obama change" started". I'll bet he is not happy.

I too am not a lawyer.

But doesn't a precedent stand for anything? Don't any other challanges have to overcome the prior ruling?

rentalguy1 · 06-28-2010, 08:51 PM

From everything I've read, this ruling will not change very much at all. They left it open for States, counties, and cities to enact draconian laws that make it nearly impossible to obtain a handgun. All they said was that a blanket ban on handguns is unconstitutional. So now all a city has to do is require permits prior to purchase. The requirements to obtain a permit can be as tough and as expensive as they want them to be. They can also drag their feet on issuing a permit for as long as they want, and it would be legal. This was not really that big of a win at all...

belercous · 06-28-2010, 09:51 PM

Quote: "As noted above, it was the typical 5:4 split and my guess is that the "5" are always the same "5" and the "4" are always the same "4".[/QUOTE]

When the decision is 5-4, no. 5 is Justice Kennedy. He is the swing vote.

Hopefully, this decision will lay to rest the canard about "activist" courts only doing harm. Activist courts can be good or bad, depending upon what side you are on, and this case proves it also works for the right. Overturning over 220 yrs. of "settled" law is as "activist" as you can get.

I'm going to read the full text now, and whoa, is it a long one. Interesting note; Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Very unusual for him to write anything more than what he's required.
Hopefully my state of Illinois can get concealed carry. Don't know yet, but this case wasn't about "bearing" arms, that will likely be another suit.

06-28-2010, 09:42 AM	#2
rentalguy1 Former Guest Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: The mountains of NE TN. Posts: 884	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban 5-4 split as expected. I wonder if this could be used in my home state to turn over bans on legal concealed carry in publicly funded places, such as city parks?

06-28-2010, 09:57 AM	#3
red14 Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: N FLA Posts: 3,914	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban This is great news, especially for Chicago and it's #1 gun hater. __________________ I never argue, I state my opinion, and support my position.

06-28-2010, 09:59 AM	#4
Insulation Tim Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Ohio Contributor Posts: 2,300	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban What concerns me the most about the present Supreme Court is that it appears that the justices vote along party lines or ideaology rather than a legal scholarship interpretation of the Constitution. As noted above, it was the typical 5:4 split and my guess is that the "5" are always the same "5" and the "4" are always the same "4". __________________ Tim *"Remember the Ark was built by amateurs....Professionals built the Titanic"*

06-28-2010, 11:15 AM	#6
wpage Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,471	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban Elena Kagan will throw that vote the other way... Once she gets the nod. __________________ "You shall recieve power" Acts 1:8 W

06-28-2010, 11:37 AM	#7
rglbegl Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Dana point CA Posts: 531	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban 5-4 is BS!!!! The U.S. supreme court has 4 members that voted against the U.S. Constitution!!!!! I know there is a little more to it than that, but when it boils down, that is what happened.

06-28-2010, 12:30 PM	#8
Big ugly Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Knoxville Tennessee Contributor Posts: 2,603	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban The supreme court is just as bad as the other branches of government. The supreme court should be free of political and party ties and base their decisions on no bias political BS. Unfortunately our government is so corupt they cant see past their own pockets. __________________ "You say the Devil made do it with a smile. Raisin' hell and howlin at the moon. Well I'm gonna put your @$$ back in line. I'm gonna scare the Devil out of you." BlackBerry Smoke Song http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R513dA4peMg Nothing is "proof" against a truly talented fool. Swanshot

06-28-2010, 02:21 PM	#12
Prizefighter V.I.P. Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: North Carolina Contributor Posts: 412	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban Excellent. I figured this was the way it would go, but there's always a nagging worry. I hope Chigago residents are on their way to shops and ranges this week to celebrate.

06-28-2010, 04:19 PM	#13
Marlin TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: At SouthernMoss' side forever! Contributor Posts: 13,853	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban If anyone should like to read the entire opinion of the Supreme Court in McDonald vs Chicago, here it is: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf __________________ *The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing.* *The only criminal class native to the United States is Congress.*

06-28-2010, 04:35 PM	#14
rglbegl Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Dana point CA Posts: 531	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban Video by National Shooting Sports Foundation President Steve Sanetti http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9iXN...layer_embedded

06-28-2010, 04:39 PM	#15
Jim K Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 6,408	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban Kagan is replacing Stevens, one of the so-called "liberal" justices, so the balance on the court will not change. If Obama gets a chance to appoint another justice, the balance will shift dramatically with 5 left wing justices who believe, as Kagan does, that the Constitution is play-dough to be molded any way the SC "progressives" want. Jim

06-28-2010, 06:09 PM	#16
Bobitis Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 6,612	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban In the State of Washington, all judicial appointments are 'non-partisan'. So where does politics and feel good measures enter the debate? The SCotUS should be intrepreting law. There is no room for personal idealism. Or did I miss something again? Seems like I've been doing a lot of that lately. The Amendments to the Constitution read clear as day to me. I see little or no ambiguity in any of them. The wording of the 1st and 2nd is constructed in a way that there should be no doubt to their intent. When the framers wrote this document, they did in a way that may be scrutinized, yet would be unrefuteable. When they wrote about the right to bear arms, I don't think they were referring to big nasty omnivores and people with a couple limbs attached to their torso. Interesting antonyms: Right vs Gift Right vs Left Right vs Wrong A Gift from the Left is Wrong. __________________ ^.^ A point in every direction is the same as having no point at all

06-28-2010, 07:15 PM	#17
papawed Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 38	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban I am not a lawyer. I think this is a huge precedent for the right to keep and bear arms. Someone with a legal background, please interput this ruling, and tell us what it means for our future continued right. This may be the best thing that has happened since "the Obama change" started". I'll bet he is not happy.

06-28-2010, 08:51 PM	#19
rentalguy1 Former Guest Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: The mountains of NE TN. Posts: 884	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban From everything I've read, this ruling will not change very much at all. They left it open for States, counties, and cities to enact draconian laws that make it nearly impossible to obtain a handgun. All they said was that a blanket ban on handguns is unconstitutional. So now all a city has to do is require permits prior to purchase. The requirements to obtain a permit can be as tough and as expensive as they want them to be. They can also drag their feet on issuing a permit for as long as they want, and it would be legal. This was not really that big of a win at all...

06-28-2010, 09:51 PM	#20
belercous Former Guest Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 195	Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Gun Ban Quote: "As noted above, it was the typical 5:4 split and my guess is that the "5" are always the same "5" and the "4" are always the same "4".[/QUOTE] When the decision is 5-4, no. 5 is Justice Kennedy. He is the swing vote. Hopefully, this decision will lay to rest the canard about "activist" courts only doing harm. Activist courts can be good or bad, depending upon what side you are on, and this case proves it also works for the right. Overturning over 220 yrs. of "settled" law is as "activist" as you can get. I'm going to read the full text now, and whoa, is it a long one. Interesting note; Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Very unusual for him to write anything more than what he's required. Hopefully my state of Illinois can get concealed carry. Don't know yet, but this case wasn't about "bearing" arms, that will likely be another suit.