Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Court strikes down D.C. handgun law

  1. -1
    BAMAPHIN 22's Avatar
    FinHeaven Elite

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jul 2004
    Posts:
    19,668
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Huntsville, AL
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Court strikes down D.C. handgun law

    In a landmark legal victory for opponents of gun control, a federal appeals court Friday struck down a District of Columbia ban on keeping handguns in homes as a violation of the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms.

    In its 2-to-1 decision, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that the amendment's guarantee belongs to individuals and was not a collective right limited to members of militias -- something gun-control proponents long have contended.

    "The amendment does not protect the right of militiamen to keep and bear arms, but rather the right of the people," the majority opinion said. "If the competent drafters of the Second Amendment had meant the right to be limited to the protection of state militias, it is hard to imagine that they would have chosen the language they did."

    Friday's decision marks the first time a federal appeals court has struck down a gun law on Second Amendment grounds, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Handgun Violence.

    The gun-control group blasted the ruling as "judicial activism at its worst."
    Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty vowed the city will "do everything within our power to work to get this decision overturned."

    "I am personally deeply disappointed and, quite frankly, outraged by today's decision," said Fenty, who said the city would first ask the full circuit court to reconsider the case before deciding whether to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/03/09/gu...ing/index.html
    Quote Quote  

  2. -2
    branflakecereal's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Sep 2005
    Posts:
    461
    vCash:
    1131
    Loc:
    Cooper City
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by BAMAPHIN 22 View Post
    In a landmark legal victory for opponents of gun control, a federal appeals court Friday struck down a District of Columbia ban on keeping handguns in homes as a violation of the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms.

    In its 2-to-1 decision, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that the amendment's guarantee belongs to individuals and was not a collective right limited to members of militias -- something gun-control proponents long have contended.

    "The amendment does not protect the right of militiamen to keep and bear arms, but rather the right of the people," the majority opinion said. "If the competent drafters of the Second Amendment had meant the right to be limited to the protection of state militias, it is hard to imagine that they would have chosen the language they did."

    Friday's decision marks the first time a federal appeals court has struck down a gun law on Second Amendment grounds, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Handgun Violence.

    The gun-control group blasted the ruling as "judicial activism at its worst."
    Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty vowed the city will "do everything within our power to work to get this decision overturned."

    "I am personally deeply disappointed and, quite frankly, outraged by today's decision," said Fenty, who said the city would first ask the full circuit court to reconsider the case before deciding whether to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/03/09/gu...ing/index.html
    The only way this can be interpreted as judicial activism is if they had, in fact, banned handguns. Second amendment does not specify, and to add restrictions to the constitution that were never there is the very definition of judicial activism.
    Quote Quote  

  3. -3
    Roman529's Avatar
    Moon Runner / The 3 AM Crew

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jul 2004
    Posts:
    33,203
    vCash:
    8523
    Loc:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Guns don't kill people, people kill people.
    1. OG: Zack Martin, Notre Dame
    2. ILB: Chris Borland, Wisconsin
    3. TE: C.J. Fiedorowicz, Iowa
    4. DT: Daniel McCullers, Tenn
    5. FS: Kenny Ladler, Vanderbilt
    6. QB: Connor Shaw, South Carolina
    7. RB: Isaiah Crowell, RB, Alabama State
    Quote Quote  

  4. -4
    DolfinDave's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jul 2006
    Posts:
    3,915
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Memphis
    Thanks / No Thanks
    That is a good point the court made about the language of the ammendment. It had already been established that there was to be a military. The Bill or Rights is more geared towards individual rights. And since the military had already be established, its hard to think they were being redundant and not talking about individuals.


    Quote Quote  

  5. -5
    finfansince72's Avatar
    Hall Of Famer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2005
    Posts:
    6,627
    vCash:
    1000
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Im a supporter of gun rights but DC is a warzone in parts. I find it amusing that the same people applauding this will be supporting Guilani who opposed gun rights in New York.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -6
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    100
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Sunny Scotland
    Thanks / No Thanks
    I'm afraid that the gun control question will never be solved , that horse has bolted and the number of legal challenges made surrounding this issue mean that you ain't getting it back.

    Interpretation of the decision as judicial activism smacks of petulance by the gun control lobby. Construct your argument in a better way and go after the root cause of it rather than the tools. Social deprivation and a decline in morals to the point where the current generation hold little or no respect for anything other than themselves.
    Quote Quote  

  7. -7
    PBFloyd's Avatar
    Lone Gunman

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2007
    Posts:
    351
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Tampa, Florida
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by finfansince72 View Post
    I find it amusing that the same people applauding this will be supporting Guilani who opposed gun rights in New York.
    Not so, the National Rifle Association does not endorse Rudy at all, he is listed on their list of 2nd Amendment Offenders; and I don't see them supporting him if he some how wins the 08' nomination.

    For example, Bloomberg, a Republican is also on that list along with a bunch of other Elephants.

    The NRA Endorses almost as many Democrats as they do Republicans.



    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Part of Voting Rights Act
    By JamesBW43 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-26-2013, 12:54 PM
  2. First 3-D printable handgun under fire
    By Spesh in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-13-2013, 10:31 AM
  3. Supreme Court strikes down Chicago handgun ban
    By phinfan3411 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-18-2010, 09:40 AM
  4. Supreme Court strikes down death penalty for rape of child.
    By Tetragrammaton in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-26-2008, 12:29 AM
  5. WOW Someone give this man a handgun
    By Tommy5988 in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-18-2004, 01:28 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •