DC Puts Supreme Court on Notice: Showdown of the Century is Coming

[Guest Patriot Games]

http://www.kcbs.com/topic/ap_news.php?story=AP/APTV/National/a/a/GunBan

 

District of Columbia to ask U.S. Supreme Court to preserve its sweeping

private handgun ban

Monday, July 16, 2007

 

WASHINGTON (AP) District of Columbia officials said Monday they will ask the

Supreme Court to preserve the city's 30-year-old ban on private ownership of

handguns that was struck down by a lower court earlier this year.

 

If it chooses to take the case, the high court could end its long silence on

the scope of individual gun rights under the Second Amendment, a prospect

welcomed by both sides of the gun debate.

 

A federal appeals court panel overturned the ban in March, concluding that

the city's broad gun law was unconstitutional. In deciding to fight that

ruling, Mayor Adrian Fenty said public safety was paramount in a city

plagued by gun violence even after the law was enacted in 1976.

 

``The handgun ban in the District of Columbia has saved many lives since

then and will continue to do so if it remains enforced,'' he said,

surrounded by top city police officials and politicians.

 

The odds of the Supreme Court taking the case are unclear. The high court

has not directly ruled on the Second Amendment in nearly 70 years and chose

not to take up a 2003 case that challenged California's ban on assault

weapons.

 

If the court rules against the district, it could affect tough gun laws in

other cities and states. Several other jurisdictions, including

Massachusetts, Maryland, Chicago and San Francisco, supported D.C. in the

lower court cases, according to city Attorney General Linda Singer.

 

``We believe we are right on the law, and we hope the Supreme Court will

agree with us,'' she said.

 

Washington's gun law bars residents from keeping handguns in their homes and

prohibits the carrying of a gun without a license. Registered firearms such

as rifles and shotguns must be kept unloaded and disassembled or fitted with

trigger locks.

 

The law remains in effect during the appeals process, but if the Supreme

Court refuses to take the case, the lower court ruling overturning the city

law would go into effect, forcing D.C. to rewrite its gun laws.

 

Six plaintiffs sued in 2003, including a police officer whose application to

own a gun in his home was denied and a woman who said she was harassed by

drug dealers when she tried to get them to leave her neighborhood. They and

gun rights advocates say the handgun law prevents residents from protecting

themselves against crime.

 

The city argued the Second Amendment's gun language applied only to the

rights of states to maintain citizen militias and does not cover the ability

of citizens to own handguns privately for other purposes.

 

But a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of

Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 against the city. It concluded ownership of guns

is an individual right that extends beyond merely preparation for service in

a militia. It was the first time a federal appeals court struck down gun

control regulations on Second Amendment grounds. The full appeals court

refused to reconsider the decision in May.

[Guest Jerry Kraus]

On Jul 17, 7:16 am, "Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@The_Beach.com>

wrote:

> http://www.kcbs.com/topic/ap_news.php?story=AP/APTV/National/a/a/GunBan

>

> District of Columbia to ask U.S. Supreme Court to preserve its sweeping

> private handgun ban

> Monday, July 16, 2007

>

> WASHINGTON (AP) District of Columbia officials said Monday they will ask the

> Supreme Court to preserve the city's 30-year-old ban on private ownership of

> handguns that was struck down by a lower court earlier this year.

>

> If it chooses to take the case, the high court could end its long silence on

> the scope of individual gun rights under the Second Amendment, a prospect

> welcomed by both sides of the gun debate.

>

> A federal appeals court panel overturned the ban in March, concluding that

> the city's broad gun law was unconstitutional. In deciding to fight that

> ruling, Mayor Adrian Fenty said public safety was paramount in a city

> plagued by gun violence even after the law was enacted in 1976.

>

> ``The handgun ban in the District of Columbia has saved many lives since

> then and will continue to do so if it remains enforced,'' he said,

> surrounded by top city police officials and politicians.

>

> The odds of the Supreme Court taking the case are unclear. The high court

> has not directly ruled on the Second Amendment in nearly 70 years and chose

> not to take up a 2003 case that challenged California's ban on assault

> weapons.

>

> If the court rules against the district, it could affect tough gun laws in

> other cities and states. Several other jurisdictions, including

> Massachusetts, Maryland, Chicago and San Francisco, supported D.C. in the

> lower court cases, according to city Attorney General Linda Singer.

>

> ``We believe we are right on the law, and we hope the Supreme Court will

> agree with us,'' she said.

>

> Washington's gun law bars residents from keeping handguns in their homes and

> prohibits the carrying of a gun without a license. Registered firearms such

> as rifles and shotguns must be kept unloaded and disassembled or fitted with

> trigger locks.

>

> The law remains in effect during the appeals process, but if the Supreme

> Court refuses to take the case, the lower court ruling overturning the city

> law would go into effect, forcing D.C. to rewrite its gun laws.

>

> Six plaintiffs sued in 2003, including a police officer whose application to

> own a gun in his home was denied and a woman who said she was harassed by

> drug dealers when she tried to get them to leave her neighborhood. They and

> gun rights advocates say the handgun law prevents residents from protecting

> themselves against crime.

>

> The city argued the Second Amendment's gun language applied only to the

> rights of states to maintain citizen militias and does not cover the ability

> of citizens to own handguns privately for other purposes.

>

> But a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of

> Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 against the city. It concluded ownership of guns

> is an individual right that extends beyond merely preparation for service in

> a militia. It was the first time a federal appeals court struck down gun

> control regulations on Second Amendment grounds. The full appeals court

> refused to reconsider the decision in May.

 

Patriot, you're the only one who cares about gun laws these days.

Everyone else is concerned about the war and the economy.

[Guest Igor The Terrible]

On Jul 17, 8:16 am, "Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@The_Beach.com>

wrote:

> http://www.kcbs.com/topic/ap_news.php?story=AP/APTV/National/a/a/GunBan

>

> District of Columbia to ask U.S. Supreme Court to preserve its sweeping

> private handgun ban

> Monday, July 16, 2007

>

> WASHINGTON (AP) District of Columbia officials said Monday they will ask the

> Supreme Court to preserve the city's 30-year-old ban on private ownership of

> handguns that was struck down by a lower court earlier this year.

>

> If it chooses to take the case, the high court could end its long silence on

> the scope of individual gun rights under the Second Amendment, a prospect

> welcomed by both sides of the gun debate.

>

> A federal appeals court panel overturned the ban in March, concluding that

> the city's broad gun law was unconstitutional. In deciding to fight that

> ruling, Mayor Adrian Fenty said public safety was paramount in a city

> plagued by gun violence even after the law was enacted in 1976.

>

> ``The handgun ban in the District of Columbia has saved many lives since

> then and will continue to do so if it remains enforced,'' he said,

> surrounded by top city police officials and politicians.

>

> The odds of the Supreme Court taking the case are unclear. The high court

> has not directly ruled on the Second Amendment in nearly 70 years and chose

> not to take up a 2003 case that challenged California's ban on assault

> weapons.

>

> If the court rules against the district, it could affect tough gun laws in

> other cities and states. Several other jurisdictions, including

> Massachusetts, Maryland, Chicago and San Francisco, supported D.C. in the

> lower court cases, according to city Attorney General Linda Singer.

>

> ``We believe we are right on the law, and we hope the Supreme Court will

> agree with us,'' she said.

>

> Washington's gun law bars residents from keeping handguns in their homes and

> prohibits the carrying of a gun without a license. Registered firearms such

> as rifles and shotguns must be kept unloaded and disassembled or fitted with

> trigger locks.

>

> The law remains in effect during the appeals process, but if the Supreme

> Court refuses to take the case, the lower court ruling overturning the city

> law would go into effect, forcing D.C. to rewrite its gun laws.

>

> Six plaintiffs sued in 2003, including a police officer whose application to

> own a gun in his home was denied and a woman who said she was harassed by

> drug dealers when she tried to get them to leave her neighborhood. They and

> gun rights advocates say the handgun law prevents residents from protecting

> themselves against crime.

>

> The city argued the Second Amendment's gun language applied only to the

> rights of states to maintain citizen militias and does not cover the ability

> of citizens to own handguns privately for other purposes.

>

> But a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of

> Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 against the city. It concluded ownership of guns

> is an individual right that extends beyond merely preparation for service in

> a militia. It was the first time a federal appeals court struck down gun

> control regulations on Second Amendment grounds. The full appeals court

> refused to reconsider the decision in May.

 

Handgun ban..........? Cool. If it passes, then we round up the

SCJs who approved the bill and sigined it into law; then club the

rotten sons-of-bitches to death. See how that works? Moreover, it

sets an example for future wannabe SCJs who have too many bright ideas.

[Guest C J Nelson]

On Jul 17, 7:16 am, "Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@The_Beach.com>

wrote:

> http://www.kcbs.com/topic/ap_news.php?story=AP/APTV/National/a/a/GunBan

>

> District of Columbia to ask U.S. Supreme Court to preserve its sweeping

> private handgun ban

> Monday, July 16, 2007

>

> WASHINGTON (AP) District of Columbia officials said Monday they will ask the

> Supreme Court to preserve the city's 30-year-old ban on private ownership of

> handguns that was struck down by a lower court earlier this year.

>

> If it chooses to take the case, the high court could end its long silence on

> the scope of individual gun rights under the Second Amendment, a prospect

> welcomed by both sides of the gun debate.

>

> A federal appeals court panel overturned the ban in March, concluding that

> the city's broad gun law was unconstitutional. In deciding to fight that

> ruling, Mayor Adrian Fenty said public safety was paramount in a city

> plagued by gun violence even after the law was enacted in 1976.

>

> ``The handgun ban in the District of Columbia has saved many lives since

> then and will continue to do so if it remains enforced,'' he said,

> surrounded by top city police officials and politicians.

>

> The odds of the Supreme Court taking the case are unclear. The high court

> has not directly ruled on the Second Amendment in nearly 70 years and chose

> not to take up a 2003 case that challenged California's ban on assault

> weapons.

>

> If the court rules against the district, it could affect tough gun laws in

> other cities and states. Several other jurisdictions, including

> Massachusetts, Maryland, Chicago and San Francisco, supported D.C. in the

> lower court cases, according to city Attorney General Linda Singer.

>

> ``We believe we are right on the law, and we hope the Supreme Court will

> agree with us,'' she said.

>

> Washington's gun law bars residents from keeping handguns in their homes and

> prohibits the carrying of a gun without a license. Registered firearms such

> as rifles and shotguns must be kept unloaded and disassembled or fitted with

> trigger locks.

>

> The law remains in effect during the appeals process, but if the Supreme

> Court refuses to take the case, the lower court ruling overturning the city

> law would go into effect, forcing D.C. to rewrite its gun laws.

>

> Six plaintiffs sued in 2003, including a police officer whose application to

> own a gun in his home was denied and a woman who said she was harassed by

> drug dealers when she tried to get them to leave her neighborhood. They and

> gun rights advocates say the handgun law prevents residents from protecting

> themselves against crime.

>

> The city argued the Second Amendment's gun language applied only to the

> rights of states to maintain citizen militias and does not cover the ability

> of citizens to own handguns privately for other purposes.

>

> But a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of

> Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 against the city. It concluded ownership of guns

> is an individual right that extends beyond merely preparation for service in

> a militia. It was the first time a federal appeals court struck down gun

> control regulations on Second Amendment grounds. The full appeals court

> refused to reconsider the decision in May.

 

Hardly the show down of the century (that would be a case that would

require the SCOUS to either rule Roe V Wade up or down).

 

I am in favor of the court looking at a second amendment case (they

rarely do so) it might be of significant help to the overal issue if

it is decided in an intelligent manner.

 

I hope the court takes the case.

[Guest Bret Cahill]

> Everyone else is concerned about the war and the economy.

 

The "Bong Hits for Jesus" Court never broaches any issues except

[gush]iMMMMPOOORTant culture wars.

 

Go back 30 years on Nexus with a key word search for "free speech"

combined with "public nudity" or "KKK" or "gay" or "nazi parade" or

"flag burning".

 

You'll get hundreds of hits for Art. III district and appellate

courts.

 

Then try "free speech" and "economic" or "employment."

 

Only six hits appear and it's purely coincidental that the words

appear together in the opinions of the 6 cases.

 

Free speech is simply never invoked for the only matter Thomas Paine

considered fit for public discourse or governmental control:

 

Economic issues.

 

>From the above one can conclude:

 

a. Since the Revolution Americans have become much less interested in

money

 

b. WestGroup has a better search engine

 

c. The judiciary, like the congress, the media, the educational

establishment and everything else in the United States has been under

the influence of monied interests for over a century.

 

 

Bret Cahill

 

 

"I've been a civil libertarian for 18 years and things just keep

getting worse." [i'm working so hard but I can't figure it out.

Please send some more money so I can spend the next 18 years working

hard at not figuring it out.]

 

-- dubious ACLU fundraiser pitch

[Guest Patriot Games]

"Igor The Terrible" <igor_the_terrible@mad.scientist.com> wrote in message

news:1184734190.331752.17570@g12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

> On Jul 17, 8:16 am, "Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@The_Beach.com>

> wrote:

>> http://www.kcbs.com/topic/ap_news.php?story=AP/APTV/National/a/a/GunBan

>> District of Columbia to ask U.S. Supreme Court to preserve its sweeping

>> private handgun ban

>> Monday, July 16, 2007

> Handgun ban..........? Cool. If it passes, then we round up the

> SCJs who approved the bill and sigined it into law; then club the

> rotten sons-of-bitches to death. See how that works? Moreover, it

> sets an example for future wannabe SCJs who have too many bright ideas.

 

Its a real coin toss if the SCOTUS will even hear this case. SCOTUS has

been characteristically afraid of this issue for almost a century!

 

If the SCOTUS does hear this case they will almost certainly rule FOR the

NRA.

 

Which will end all general firearms bans in America, forever.

[Guest Patriot Games]

"C J Nelson" <clarencenlsn@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:1184774035.374178.138520@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

> On Jul 17, 7:16 am, "Patriot Games" <Crazy_Bastard@The_Beach.com>

> wrote:

>> http://www.kcbs.com/topic/ap_news.php?story=AP/APTV/National/a/a/GunBan

>> District of Columbia to ask U.S. Supreme Court to preserve its sweeping

>> private handgun ban

>> Monday, July 16, 2007

> Hardly the show down of the century (that would be a case that would

> require the SCOUS to either rule Roe V Wade up or down).

 

I think that would be equal in terms of importance.

> I am in favor of the court looking at a second amendment case (they

> rarely do so) it might be of significant help to the overal issue if

> it is decided in an intelligent manner.

> I hope the court takes the case.

 

I hope they do as well.