Court Strikes Down 30-Year Old D.C. Gun Ban
67DC Gun Ban Overturned
In a ground-breaking opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently overturned the D.C. gun ban, a three decade old prohibition on possession of firearms within the Nation's Capital. Senior Judge Lawrence H. Silberman, joined by Judge Thomas B. Griffith, concluded that "the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms." Judge Karen Lecraft Henderson filed a dissenting opinion.
Background
In United States v. Emerson, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the Constitution
"protects the right of individuals, including those not then actually a member of any militia ... to privately possess and bear their own firearms ... that are suitable as personal individual weapons."
This case prompted Six District of Columbia residents wanting to be able to defend themselves in their own homes. to file a civil lawsuit in a Washington, D.C. federal court. The litigation, Parker v. District of Columbia, was not about machine guns or assault weapons. It was about the right to own ordinary, garden-variety handguns.
When all the guns are held by Government or by criminals no-one has any manners or regards for the rights of the individual. IMHO an armed society is a polite society....
The Second Amendment says, “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.”
Parker v. District of Columbia
Parker v. District of Columbia, a lawsuit brought by six D.C. residents who sought to keep functional firearms in their homes for self-defense. The appellate court reversed a lower D.C. court on all counts, and held that the activities protected by the Second Amendment "are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued intermittent enrollment in the militia."
Militia - a definition
Militia is the activity of one or more citizens organized to provide defense or paramilitary service, or those engaged in such activity. The word can have five somewhat different meanings:
* Defense activity, as well as those engaged in it, when it is defense of the public, its territory, property, and laws
* The entire able-bodied male population of a community, town, or state, which can be called to arms against an invading enemy, to enforce the law, or to respond to a disaster
* A private, non-government force, not necessarily directly supported or sanctioned by its government
* An official reserve army, composed of citizen soldiers, also called an Army Reserve, National Guard, or State Defense Forces
* The national police forces in Russia, and other former CIS countries, or the former Soviet Union: Militsiya
Links
..the latest poems from Drax..
- Poem - Dear Brothers & Sisters in the Universe
- 4 weeks ago
- Poem - X Y & Z
- 4 weeks ago
- Poem - The Dining
- 4 weeks ago
- Poem - Snake Oil
- 4 weeks ago
- Poem - The New Ireland
- 4 weeks ago
- Poem - Tomato Boxes
- 4 weeks ago
CommentsLoading...
p j o'rourke quotes a soldier who came back from somalia... "everything possible that can be accomplished with guns has been accomplished in mogadishu".
a bunch of emotionally messed up people stroking their large guns every night and occasionally shooting their spouses, children, neighbors or co-workers does not qualify as a 'militia'. :p
hi lounn good to see you lol, wise words from a wise lady.....jimmy
interesting development. the Bush Admin is starting to revoke the right for private gun ownership and my guess, you're going to see a lot more of this from the GOP. it's not in their better interests to have an armed population now that enough people have had their livings outsourced and downsized and what not.
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms.
Backed by the Justice Department, the measure would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales, licenses or permits to terror suspects.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-New Jersey, "would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere 'suspicions' of a terrorist threat."..."
They can have guns at home and only use it for protection purposes. For other type of guns, they can restrict that in Gun ranges, have lockers and use it there. They don't need to carry AK47 wherever they go. The pawn shops should be banned to have those guns, they hardly check the background of the individual.
thanks for all the comments folks, I remember reading a sci fi book a few years ago where we have modern technology and all but people still carry guns and it is perfectly acceptable to challenge someone out to the street.... guess what ....in this scenario everyone has manners... I think guns are like snakes, walking down a street of snakes you would tread warily, likewise with guns, around a room full of guns you would watch where you step ... surely this can't be all bad...
Define "suspected terrorists" if the gov wants you to be a terrorist, you will be.
thanks for this John, I guess the mistake is to allow Govt any freedom *laughs*
I agree this presidency can make laws that are broad enough to define whoever they want, but to make an accusation (Iðunn) that its purpose is to disarm the populace is ludurcrous. Especially when this precedency has been relatively pro gun.
Jimmy should take a look at the 2 million Americans that use a gun lawfully to stop an attacker before speaking on the subject. If he'd followed the court case he'd know the 2nd amendment is not about hunting or competitive shooting.
In regards to the soldier quote, I think Somalia and the problems that exist in Africa are wholly different than the ones we face here. It is an unfair comparison since Somalia is an anarchist society and ours is a republic. I can tell one thing guns did accomplish and that was our revolt from the British. So I guess there worth having for something huh, Jimmy?
jimmythejock Level 4 Commenter 5 years ago
great hub drax, although why people carry guns around is beyond me, if no one owned a gun no one would need a gun whether it be for protection or otherwise, guns should only be available for hunting and competition sport.
only my humble opinion lol.....jimmy