2nd Amendment upheld by the Supreme Court! - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 08:37 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
Bruce R.'s Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2002 SLK 32 AMG, bone stock. 1987 190E 2.3-16 valve (destroyed). 2005 E320 new toy.
Location: Near Washington, DC
Posts: 14,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
2nd Amendment upheld by the Supreme Court!

Looks like DC citizens have become true citizens …. Finally…….


Supreme Court finds individual right to own guns | Reuters

"Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon, the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, on the board and then struts around like it won the game."
Vladimir Putin

"They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?"
Paul Harvey 8/31/94


"The only people who have quick answers don't have the responsibility of making the decisions."
Justice Clarence Thomas

Last edited by Bruce R.; 06-26-2008 at 08:38 AM. Reason: add link
Bruce R. is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 09:04 AM
Cruise Control
 
Zeitgeist's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: '87 300TD/'90 300D/'94 Quattro/'89 Vanagon TDI/'01 EV Weekender VR6
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 51,730
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1426 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
fuck

Glad it was a split decision, and will be interested to read the dissenting views

Last edited by Zeitgeist; 06-26-2008 at 09:10 AM.
Zeitgeist is offline  
post #3 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 09:26 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
Bruce R.'s Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2002 SLK 32 AMG, bone stock. 1987 190E 2.3-16 valve (destroyed). 2005 E320 new toy.
Location: Near Washington, DC
Posts: 14,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeitgeist View Post
fuck

Glad it was a split decision, and will be interested to read the dissenting views
I find it hard to understand the liberal mind set. One would think that as much as you all hate the Bush Administration, you would want to be able to defend yourselves from what more of the same could or would do to you.

"Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon, the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, on the board and then struts around like it won the game."
Vladimir Putin

"They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?"
Paul Harvey 8/31/94


"The only people who have quick answers don't have the responsibility of making the decisions."
Justice Clarence Thomas
Bruce R. is offline  
post #4 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 09:38 AM
~BANNED~
 
Jakarta Expat's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2006
Vehicle: PM me to Join the Expat Muslims for Obama Club........
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 17,697
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeitgeist View Post
fuck

Glad it was a split decision, and will be interested to read the dissenting views
Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 10:52 am

UPDATE 10:52: The opinion can be downloaded here. Relevant quotes from the majority opinion can be found here, and a replay of our LiveBlog can be found here. Tom’s commentary is here.

Answering a 127-year old constitutional question, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to have a gun, at least in one’s home. The Court, splitting 5-4, struck down a District of Columbia ban on handgun possession. Although times have changed since 1791, Justice Antonin Scalia said for the majority, “it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.”

Examining the words of the Amendment, the Court concluded “we find they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weaons in case of confrontation” — in other words, for self-defense. “The inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right,” it added.

The individual right interpretation, the Court said, ”is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment,” going back to 17th Century England, as well as by gun rights laws in the states before and immediately after the Amendment was put into the U.S. Constitution.

What Congress did in drafting the Amendment, the Court said, was “to codify a pre-existing right, rather than to fashion a new one.”

Justice Scalia’s opinion stressed that the Court was not casting doubt on long-standing bans on carrying a concealed gun or on gun possession by felons or the mentally retarded, on laws barring guns from schools or government buildings, and laws putting conditions on gun sales.

The Court took no position on whether the Second Amendment right restricts only federal government powers, or also curbs the power of states to regulate guns. In a footnote, Scalia said that the issue of “incorporating” the Second into the Fourteenth Amendment, thus applying it to the states, was “a question not presented by this case.” But the footnote said decisions in 1886 and 1894 had reaffirmed that the Amendment “applies only to the Federal Government.” Whether the Court will reopen that issue thus will depend upon future cases.

In District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290), the Court nullified two provisions of the city of Washington’s strict 1976 gun control law: a flat ban on possessing a gun in one’s home, and a requirement that any gun — except one kept at a business — must be unloaded and disassembled or have a trigger lock in place. The Court said it was not passing on a part of the law requiring that guns be licensed. It said that issuing a license to a handgun owner, so the weapon can be used at home, would be a sufficient remedy for the Second Amendment violation of denying any access to a handgun.

Justice Scalia’s recitation from the bench of the majority’s reasoning continued for 16 minutes. Justice John Paul Stevens followed, for seven minutes, summarizing the reasons for two dissenting opinions — his and one written by Justice Stephen G. Breyer.

The decision was the final one of the Term and, after issuing it, the Court recessed for the summer, to return on Monday, Oct. 6. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., said that concluding orders on pending cases will be released by the Court Clerk at 10 a.m. Friday.

SCOTUSblog

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-cont...06/07-2901.pdf
Jakarta Expat is offline  
post #5 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 10:17 AM
Cruise Control
 
Zeitgeist's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: '87 300TD/'90 300D/'94 Quattro/'89 Vanagon TDI/'01 EV Weekender VR6
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 51,730
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1426 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce R. View Post
I find it hard to understand the liberal mind set. One would think that as much as you all hate the Bush Administration, you would want to be able to defend yourselves from what more of the same could or would do to you.
I'm hardly a liberal, but I do understand the mindset.

Firearms are useless as a defense against the government. The pen is far mightier than any handgun
Zeitgeist is offline  
post #6 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 11:39 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Something I have seldom said about this particular SCOTUS but this seemed a reasonable reading of the laws and did not wander in to activist territory.

It did not provide "gunslinger" opportunities for those who fear it and it did not provide a "fascist state" ruling that those on the other side felt could happen at some time.

It seems to simply say that a man has the right to defend himself and his family and the government can't hamper that right.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #7 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 01:27 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
Bruce R.'s Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2002 SLK 32 AMG, bone stock. 1987 190E 2.3-16 valve (destroyed). 2005 E320 new toy.
Location: Near Washington, DC
Posts: 14,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
Something I have seldom said about this particular SCOTUS but this seemed a reasonable reading of the laws and did not wander in to activist territory.

It did not provide "gunslinger" opportunities for those who fear it and it did not provide a "fascist state" ruling that those on the other side felt could happen at some time.

It seems to simply say that a man has the right to defend himself and his family and the government can't hamper that right.
No one can ask for anything more....

There can be no doubt that guns, especially hand guns aren't for everyone, they can get you in more trouble than you can handle, but the facts tend to show when firearms are available to the population, the crime rate goes down.
I found this site: District of Columbia Crime Rates 1960 - 2006

You might notice a sudden increase in homicides in 1964, that’s the year they started to take the guns away from the law abiding citizens in DC. The rate goes up through to the drug wars in the mid to late 90’s and then slowly tapers off, but the second link: Washington Crime Statistics (DC) - CityRating.com shows that the murder rate is almost 6 X the National average, all this in a city that “doesn’t allow guns”…..
I tend to think that if private citizens had some form of defense the bad guys might think twice about committing a crime.

"Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon, the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, on the board and then struts around like it won the game."
Vladimir Putin

"They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?"
Paul Harvey 8/31/94


"The only people who have quick answers don't have the responsibility of making the decisions."
Justice Clarence Thomas
Bruce R. is offline  
post #8 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 02:39 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2007
Vehicle: 2005 SL 55 "k" 26K 1967 250 SL ?K 1984 500 SEC 242K http://www.flickr.com/photos/mercebman/
Location: CA
Posts: 998
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce R. View Post
I find it hard to understand the liberal mind set. One would think that as much as you all hate the Bush Administration, you would want to be able to defend yourselves from what more of the same could or would do to you.
The Constitution of the United States guarantees to you the right to bear arms...You have the unquestioned right, under the law, to defend your life and protect the sanctity of your fireside. Failing in either, you are a coward and a craven and undeserving of the name of man." -- Eugene V. Debs
hilld is offline  
post #9 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 02:49 PM
~BANNED~
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2002 clk320
Location: Lancaster, Kentucky
Posts: 8,498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Is there an amendment right to bare 30 packs of budweiser?
the clk man is offline  
post #10 of 113 (permalink) Old 06-26-2008, 03:15 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2007
Vehicle: 2005 SL 55 "k" 26K 1967 250 SL ?K 1984 500 SEC 242K http://www.flickr.com/photos/mercebman/
Location: CA
Posts: 998
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeitgeist View Post
I'm hardly a liberal, but I do understand the mindset.

Firearms are useless as a defense against the government. The pen is far mightier than any handgun

Maybe not handguns. But rifles sure can make a standing army bleed to death over time. Kentucky rifles were highly effective over a superior Brittish army. The Viet cong even with their crappy equipment did a lot of damage to us with hit and run tactics. One man in a clock tower did how much damage?
hilld is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Proof of ID to vote upheld by Supreme Court 430 Off-Topic 20 04-28-2008 09:54 PM
    the beauty of Gun ownership (2nd amendment benz rider Off-Topic 174 10-02-2007 10:47 AM
    The other recent Supreme Court ruling and your money bgoin Off-Topic 0 07-07-2007 05:33 PM
    Mann Coulter doesn't like new Supreme Court nominee, so he must be OK FeelTheLove Off-Topic 9 07-20-2005 07:13 PM
    Very significant ruling by the Nebraska Supreme Court GeeS Off-Topic 11 02-02-2005 10:24 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome