Are you gun nuts ready for the Supreme Court?

fly

fly

omg
Oct 1, 2004
79,129
27,225
1,323
Marklar
₥84,291
Steam
mattressfish
So the Supreme Court is set to hear a case regarding the hadgun ban in Washington D.C. Apparently, D.C. thinks that they can control their murder rates by preventing law abiding citizens from keeping hand guns in the house. Thank God that the law breakers, ya know - the murderers, abide by all local gun laws.

So anyway...

I'm not too up on the 2nd Amendment in the court system, but apparently past High Court(s) have somewhat suggested that the 2nd Amendment refers more to state militias than individual gun owners. This could spell trouble for personal firearms.

fly prediction: The Court will issue a ruling while attempting to sidestep the 2nd completely.
 
I considered making a thread about this hear but figured no one would really care.

I'm not worried about it.
 
fly said:
True, but if there is a history of siding on behalf of the state militias then, barring some crazy evidence, the Court is obligated to continue on that track, ie. stare decisis.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. SCOTUS has been known to completely reverse its opinion on a number of issues.
 
fly said:
If they interpret the 2nd Amendment to mean only state militias then LOTS could change.
Click to expand...

They won't. Again, we have a conservative court right now with a very wise Roberts at the wheel. At this point I'm wondering whether the court will find the second amendment an individual right or a fundamental right. If the latter, strict scrutiny will apply on any restrictions, meaning Chicago will probably have its anti-gun laws nixed and I'll finally get to carry concealed in this state. :p


I'm not worried. The court is reliably on our side in this one. If by some outside chance they do interpret the 2nd to mean state militias - which they won't because no reasonable judge, even the liberals, can't escape the basic rules of grammar in addition to the framers' intent - heads will fucking roll. I'm not even kidding, we will see Waco-like events sprout up all over the country if mass bannings of firearms start to take place.
 
fly said:
If they interpret the 2nd Amendment to mean only state militias then LOTS could change.
Click to expand...

In all seriousness, the 2nd is already dead. There will only be ever increasing restrictions and hoops to jump through, but the outright gun ban that libertarian nutjobs like me fear will likely never happen.

The FedGov relies on private industry to come up with innovations in firepower, private industry gets the bulk of it's profit from consumers which pays for the research for said innovations.

Although I suppose they could just subsidize the choice companies to keep them alive a la Amtrak and the airlines :rolleyes:
 
FlyNavy said:
Not necessarily. SCOTUS has been known to completely reverse its opinion on a number of issues.
Click to expand...

Of course they have, but generally...

FlyNavy said:
They won't. Again, we have a conservative court right now with a very wise Roberts at the wheel. At this point I'm wondering whether the court will find the second amendment an individual right or a fundamental right. If the latter, strict scrutiny will apply on any restrictions, meaning Chicago will probably have its anti-gun laws nixed and I'll finally get to carry concealed in this state. :p

I'm not worried. The court is reliably on our side in this one. If by some outside chance they do interpret the 2nd to mean state militias - which they won't because no reasonable judge, even the liberals, can't escape the basic rules of grammar in addition to the framers' intent
Click to expand...

I completely disagree that its painfully obvious of their intent. State militias were quite common then, and by reading the Amendment alone its impossible to tell IMO.

Now, if there are other writings from the time that more obviously tell us their intent, I'm open to listening to that. Otherwise, it isn't exactly open and shut.

- heads will fucking roll. I'm not even kidding, we will see Waco-like events sprout up all over the country if mass bannings of firearms start to take place.
Click to expand...
That makes you law abiding citizens sound great! On the other hand, I'm willing to bet the vast majority of people won't even care, because they don't care about ANYTHING but Grey's Anatomy and SUVs.
 
Last edited:
ChikkenNoodul said:
In all seriousness, the 2nd is already dead. There will only be ever increasing restrictions and hoops to jump through, but the outright gun ban that libertarian nutjobs like me fear will likely never happen.

The FedGov relies on private industry to come up with innovations in firepower, private industry gets the bulk of it's profit from consumers which pays for the research for said innovations.

Although I suppose they could just subsidize the choice companies to keep them alive a la Amtrak and the airlines :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm guessing Iraq and Afghanistan have lined their pockets quite nicely. Additionally, neither of those wars (or the impending war with Iran) are likely to end soon...
 
fly said:
On the other hand, I'm willing to bet the vast majority of people won't even care, because they don't care about ANYTHING but Grey's Anatomy and SUVs.
Click to expand...
Exactafrickinmundo dude.

As much as I want the people of this country to think about what happened in the past, people are far to friggin' busy to care about what is now considered a "hobby" at best to people, and a sickness to many.

I've met many supposed gun owners, who really didn't give a flip because they already had THEIR guns, who cares about everyone else. That's the lovely "me first" attitude that is ever growing.
 
fly said:
I completely disagree that its painfully obvious of their intent. State militias were quite common then, and by reading the Amendment alone its impossible to tell IMO.
Click to expand...
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall no be infringed" pretty damn obvious to me :p and any honest grammatical analysis of the entire thing will tell you that the "militia" qualifier in no way limits the second portion of the sentence

That being said, they said "milita". Not "state militia" but "militia". Which at the time of the writing was every 17-45 year old male that wasn't a part of the uniformed service. So technically you and I are part of the militia. :fly:
Now, if there are other writings from the time that more obviously tell us their intent, I'm open to listening to that. Otherwise, it isn't exactly open and shut.
Click to expand...
Well yeah. Every statement that every one of the founding fathers ever made on the subject of firearms was that they need to remain in the hands of the people to prevent tyranny. There has never been any debate as to their intent, the problem is that anti-gunners choose to ignore it. :(


edit: http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndfqu.html
That makes you law abiding citizens sound great! On the other hand, I'm willing to bet the vast majority of people won't even care, because they don't care about ANYTHING but Grey's Anatomy and SUVs.
Click to expand...

Hey, I don't necessarily agree with said Waco-like events. I'd be pretty fucking fearful of those but you have to realize that an outright ban against guns is akin to an outright ban against free speech or a completely nullification of the right to trial jury or protections against illegal search and seizure. If such things are not reason enough for armed resistance, what is?

You're right that the vast majority won't care. :( However the government's own estimates puts the current population of gun owners at around 80 million. If just ten percent of those care, that'd be enough to make a difference. :eek:
 
Last edited:
ChikkenNoodul said:
Exactafrickinmundo dude.

As much as I want the people of this country to think about what happened in the past, people are far to friggin' busy to care about what is now considered a "hobby" at best to people, and a sickness to many.

I've met many supposed gun owners, who really didn't give a flip because they already had THEIR guns, who cares about everyone else. That's the lovely "me first" attitude that is ever growing.
Click to expand...

My biggest beef with most gun owners isn't their attitude on guns but rather their attitude on everything else. So many only care about that one right and would gladly sacrifice the others in the name of "national security" or to make Jesus happy. :rolleyes:

I've mentioned this before but the best friend to the second amendment isn't the NRA, it's Pink Pistols. Gays are the number one demographic that gun owners should be courting because not only do they have a damn good reason to be armed but they have an incredibly disproportionate control of the liberal mindset.

If the Fab Five were proudly packing you better believe we'd have better gun laws. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back