iDRY Vacuum Kilns

Sponsors:

Supreme Court rules in favor of gun owners

Started by Cedarman, June 26, 2008, 11:48:06 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Cedarman

Looks like gun owners dodged a bullet.  5 to 4 decision in favor of DC citizens being able to own guns.  Won't know the full details until Scalia gives the written opinion.

People may not like Bush as president, but would we have had the same decision if Gore or Kerry had put their people on the Supreme Court?  Thank goodness for Bush.
I am in the pink when sawing cedar.

Lanier_Lurker

I'm happy about this decision, but I am sick and tired of most of the Supreme Court decisions over the past few years being sharply divided and polarized - either 5-4 or the occasional 6-3.

What that tells me is that there are people sitting on the high court that are not being intellectually honest - and they are injecting to much politics and personal opinion into their rulings.

tcsmpsi

The Supreme upheld the individual's right to "bear arms", which, historically and categorically include any weapon for use as a defensive tool.  The term, language and the spirit in which it was written is irrelevant to "guns", though firearms can be considered as arms.

Unfortunately, it has not been discovered and ruled that the Second Ammendment, to be upheld,  would include the "shall not be infringed" part as well.

Honestly, I'm not certain even the judges who ruled acknowledge that contingency.  Fortunately, the Bush Administration's brief did not seem to make any significant impact on the ruling.

Ultimately, the only real 'ruling' that has been presented, is that law abiding citizens of DC can posses firearms/handguns on their private property.

Upholding the individual's right, though primarily significant, will have little impact until the infringement on that right is determined.

Even though, in my opinion, it has been clear these past couple of centuries.

Yes, I adamantly believe any citizen should be able to possess any arm (as in the spirit from whence it was conceived) that government has available.  Provided by the clear dialogue which regards the Second Ammendment as a protection of the People against a tyrannical government.

Were this actually upheld in its clarity, this in itself, may give quite the cautionary approach to chemical, biological, nuclear, etc. arms.

Of course, this does present precedent where actions can (suits filed, etc.) be taken to challenge most any attribute of  arms infringement.   

It is my understanding that the NRA is already gearing up to present such challenges.
\\\"In the end, it is a moral question as to whether man applies what he has learned or not.\\\" - C. Jung

Toolman

I just read one Supreme Court Justice opinion. He said handguns are an accepted weapon due to the fact that you can point and shoot with one hand as you use use other hand to call police on phone. No kidding!! I think it was justice Scalia.
Of course Dianne Feinstein(Frankenstein), stated that America will be much more dangerous because of this ruling. Of course she would say that. 

I love this ruling, it was way overdue. This ruling will give the United Nations something more to complain about. 8) 8) 8) :D :D :D 8) 8). :) :)

I'll throw this one in for the anti-gunners :'( :'( :'( :'(  may your shallow theories R.I.P
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have" (Thomas Jefferson)

flip

How I read the opinions was basically that the amendment did not say you can't possess a handgun for protection while the other opinion stated that it did not say you can.  Probably when it was written the amendment was pretty clear and consise and there was little in the way of open interpretation.  With the legal system and crafty word benders we have now it s entire possible that that short phrase could be rearranged, twisted and contorted to say what ever.
On a side note there are only 2 registered firearms dealers in the DC area...can you say, payday?
Owners with unregistered firearms must fill out an application to apply to have a legal firearm registered. ??? ::)
I have a feeling in 5 years we will be hearing a very reluctant report from the media that crime in the DC area is down, like to see the media make a bad thing out of that.
Timberking B-20, Hydraulics make me board quick

thedeeredude

 8) 8) 8)  When will fully automatics be legal again? ;D 

flip

If'n ya need full auto you ain't a very good shot. ;D
Timberking B-20, Hydraulics make me board quick

bck

 8) 8) 8)

Outlawing guns will just cause a lot more people to become gunsmiths. Which will be more dangerous? the way it is now of after people start using ink pens  ::)
  Imagine if Newley had a milling machine .

DR_Buck



Finally.....a bit of common sense out of that cesspool I work near.
Been there, done that.   Never got caught [/b]
Retired and not doing much anymore and still not getting caught

scsmith42

Quote from: thedeeredude on June 26, 2008, 04:35:02 PM
8) 8) 8)  When will fully automatics be legal again? ;D 

They are legal right now, subject to the laws of the state that you reside in.  What was changed in 1986 was the further manufacture of full auto's for civilian ownership; the inventory that was in existance prior to then is still lawful to own - again subject to the laws of your state.

As I recall, something like 37 states allow private ownership of full autos, as long as you go through the state and federal  approval process.
Peterson 10" WPF with 65' of track
Smith - Gallagher dedicated slabber
Tom's 3638D Baker band mill
and a mix of log handling heavy equipment.

Bibbyman

Quote from: Cedarman on June 26, 2008, 11:48:06 AM
Looks like gun owners dodged a bullet.  5 to 4 decision in favor of DC citizens being able to own guns.  Won't know the full details until Scalia gives the written opinion.

People may not like Bush as president, but would we have had the same decision if Gore or Kerry had put their people on the Supreme Court?  Thank goodness for Bush.

Kind of makes you think about the upcoming presidential election and what's at stake.  One vote kept the second amendment.  And he often votes with the four liberal judges.   
Wood-Mizer LT40HDE25 Super 25hp 3ph with Command Control and Accuset.
Sawing since '94

ellmoe

Quote from: Lanier_Lurker on June 26, 2008, 12:08:07 PM
I'm happy about this decision, but I am sick and tired of most of the Supreme Court decisions over the past few years being sharply divided and polarized - either 5-4 or the occasional 6-3.

What that tells me is that there are people sitting on the high court that are not being intellectually honest - and they are injecting to much politics and personal opinion into their rulings.

   My thoughts exactly. The Black Robes are overstepping their bounds.

Mark
Thirty plus years in the sawmill/millwork business. A sore back and arthritic fingers to prove it!

mdvaden

This brings to mind a post I saw on a Grants Pass, Oregon, forum, this week, where a question was posed to the Sheriff about why it took like an hour for them to respond to a potential shooting location.

Regardless of the reason, that post reminded me of something I read about police being "historians" and that something like 5 minutes is the average time for police to respond to an emergency where someone is in grave danger.

And considering that a good knife fighter can get someone in about 5 seconds from 100 feet away, I think that this issue  about gun ownership is a bit rediculous at times.

rebocardo

I am pleased with the decision  8)

Now to extend that to national parks and we will be all set.

I think all the people involved with the Bill of Rights were laugh if they were told they couldn't carry a knife over 3", a handgun, or had to register a firearm for any reason.

Don_Papenburg

It's a good day in America .  Now if we can get rid of the infrigment of gun /arms ownership  law in the state of Illinois.  The one they call a FOID( firearms owner i d )card . That goofy law claims an air gun is a fire arm if it is of 22 cal. or more and/or has a muzzel volocity of 700 fps.  It has to be renewed every five years ,and the citizens have to pay to exercise their second amendment rights. 
Frick saw mill  '58   820 John Deere power. Diamond T trucks

Tom

It sounds like y'all need to change elected officials, Don.  :)

Don_Papenburg

We need to somehow sink Chicago and all the leftwing liberals in the lake .  They have so much power now that they are fighting amongst themselvs and the state congress can't get anything done. Yes we need a change
Frick saw mill  '58   820 John Deere power. Diamond T trucks

Warbird

Quote from: Bibbyman on June 26, 2008, 05:51:36 PMKind of makes you think about the upcoming presidential election and what's at stake.  One vote kept the second amendment.  And he often votes with the four liberal judges.   

That is what I thought, Bibby.  I believe what the Founding Fathers meant in their documents is pretty cut n' dried (especially when you read all of their letters).  It is so sad to see what we have done and are doing to this country.

fencerowphil (Phil L.)

Thinking of the original intent...

Back in that time a militia was a group of volunteers who could
be called upon to defend a community.  The group came to that
call with their own weapons, food, and transportation, such as it
was.  In light of this setting, the wording is absolutely clear.  To say
it simply,  a militia could not function without arms and its arms were
owned by the voluteers, rather than being provided by big government.


Since it is useful to refer to the original documents, here are the
words of those very wise men:

Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed
.


Have you ever noticed that those who debate the Constitution seldom quote it and
seldom provide it for you to consider as any discussion of it proceeds
?
Bi-VacAtional:  Piano tuner and sawyer.  (Use one to take a vacation from the other.) Have two Stihl 090s, one Stihl 075, Echo CS8000, Echo 346,  two Homely-ite 27AVs, Peterson 10" Swingblade Winch Production Frame, 36" and 54"Alaskan mills, and a sore back.

ely

the sad thing IMO is that the issue was even up before the supreme court. if the world was right to begin with the issue would have been quelled 27 or 32 years ago when they banned the guns in DC.

Tom

There are also two grammatical constructions of the amendment.  The original, and a "corrected" one that is used when a different meaning is needed to promote controversy.  Why a "corrected" version?  Because some folks think that the founders didn't know enough Engish to write what they intended.  

A comma  here and there can sure change the meaning of a sentence.  So, the arguement is, was the amendment corrected or changed?

Thank goodness that the Supreme Court's purpose is to interpret the constitution, not correct it.   Some of members might not understand that.  :)

zopi

I do solemnly swear to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America...

I wish our elected and appointed official would take that as seriously as I do...

I'm pleased with the decision, but I do not believe it goes far enough...Shall not be infringed..there needs to be some definition,
ie..mortar rounds, nuclear devices..whatever..but for a law abiding citizen to have to register a weapon..nahh..I'll invite your attention to Poland in the late 1930's...

It's a good thing that Justice Scalia does not suffer from dyslexia..I don't think a bear would know what to make of a Glock. lol
Got Wood?
LT-15G GO chassis added.
WM sharpener and setter
And lots of junk.

Warbird

Quote from: zopi on June 27, 2008, 09:42:24 AMIt's a good thing that Justice Scalia does not suffer from dyslexia..I don't think a bear would know what to make of a Glock. lol

HAH!!  Now that's funny.  :D :D

WildDog

Congratulations on the ruling re: your 2nd amendment, you guys up there deffinately have it good.

I can recall the good old days in my state down under, you reached 18yrs went to the police paid $9 and got a paper lic, name age and address, no dramas......... :)Now days its nearly to much hassle to hold a firearms licence, if I didn't have the farm and need them for my job I wouldn't bother, I am going through the renewal process now, (every 5 years). I have to fill out the application form accompanied with 2 page forms for every "reason to obtain" my reasons are "Animal Welfare Govt Agency" "Pest Animal Govt Agency", Primary Producer", Recreational Hunter"  plus i have a "D" classification for semi autos for work this is more forms. To buy a FA you need to pay $30 and send off a permit to aquire wait 6 to 10 weeks for permission, now if you want a hand gun thats a whole different thing altogether.

In the past at work us Rangers have carried our own personal firearms, this way we can pull up to a livestock vehice accident, autopsies, cattle sale, or pest animal job confident the rifle is still accurate and hasn't been tampered with etc. Now the department has a MOU with the firearms registry stating there is to be 1 Lic holder authorised to issue and service firearms and that no personal weapons are to be used. I will be the Lic holder which has mean't a stack more forms most identical to the ones for my personal Lic, the other guys will still need personal Lic's.

As the department has to purchase firearms the cost will be substantial, we will probably need unscoped .22cal, 12 gauge and Scopped .223, .308, the scoped rifles won't be shared and we will all need one of each. All our firearms need to be registered and there is strict carrying rules....The carriage I have no probs with.

Our lic system is incredible when I was a Prison Officer involved in transport and response we were trained in .40cal Glocks, .38rev .223semi auto, pump action 12 gauges, .40 cal semi auto cabines, the training was excellent and thorough, for my unit the glock alone was 1500rounds with all but 2shots scored and we were cleared through interpol, what I'm getting at is in order to shoot or own a firearm outside of work we still had to hold the personal Lic. ??? No way does the mandatory approx 2hr Gun safety Awareness questionair involving no actual firearms come close to our training, military and some police would be the same.

My appologies for rambling, unfortunaley I am a real stickler for the law and rarely bend rules so the chance to have a whinge is the extent of my stance. 

If you start feeling "Blue" ...breath    JD 5510 86hp 4WD loader Lucas 827, Pair of Husky's 372xp, 261 & Stihl 029

TexasTimbers

Not attempting to turn this into a "religious" discussion, but of course when you discuss "original intent", one thing that stands out even amongst the agnostic/athiest/non-fundamental and even the federalist of the founders, was that nearly to a man, they acklowedged that right came from God not the US Constitution. Of course this is part and parcel of where and how the waters have been effectively muddied over the years.

When the court inpterprets the limitations of the central government,m as clearly defined by the Bill of Rights, as not coming from God but from the central government itslef, then that makes the central government become the giver of the law, and able and willing to erode those rights.

The US Constituiton was not written by our founders to delineate rights of the citizens of the several states. It was written to establish "type" of government they gave us (a republic not a democracy), and to prescribe the duties of that central government and the several states;the mechanical workings.

The founders said - it ain't enough to protect the God given rights that are inherent to man. Common Sense and The Federalists Papers alone will illuminate the fact that the thnking of the day was that rights came form God himslef, not from ploitical entities.

Of course, it don't work that way now, and never has but we did come closer than any other nation in history. We still enjoy more liberty than any other society I know of. But we must be ever vigilent and always suspicous of government.

I like the ruling on the surface. But I am suspicious. :)
The oil is all in Texas, but the dipsticks are in D.C.

Thank You Sponsors!