http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25390404/

Court says individuals have right to own guns

Decision is justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history

http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photo_StoryLevel/080626/080626-supreme-court-hmed-730a.h2.jpgStefan Zaklin / EPA
People line up outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Thursday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/images/icons/slideshow.gif (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25390603/displaymode/1176/rstry/25390404/) View related photos (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25390603/displaymode/1176/rstry/25390404/)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/images/icons/video.gifVideo
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Video/080626/n_pwms_courtguns_080626.vsmall.jpg (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:vPlayer%28%2725391019%27,%27d0ab3838-01af-4022-9224-2bdff24a43f5%27%29)

Court declares right to own guns (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:vPlayer%28%2725391019%27,%27d0ab3838-01af-4022-9224-2bdff24a43f5%27%29)
June 26: In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has reaffirmed the right for individuals to own firearms, striking down Washington D.C.'s ban on handguns. NBC's Pete Williams reports.
MSNBC



Stand and be counted
http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/msnbc/Sections/NEWS/A_U.S.%20News/U.S.%20Life/z_Gut_Check/ART/tz152_GutCheckAmerica3.thumb.gif (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19357599/)What keeps you up at night? Gut Check America wants you to tell us what really matters to our country. Click here to learn more and get involved. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19357599/)




Related stories
What’s this? (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3303511/#Related%20Stories)
Supreme Court Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25390393/)
Gun rights before Supreme Court (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25175683/)






MSNBC and NBC News
updated 17 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.
The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.
The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "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."
The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.
Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for four colleagues, said the Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home."
In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."
He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."
Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.
'Landmark victory'
The ruling quickly became fodder for the presidential race. Sen. John McCain lauded the decision in a written statement, calling it a "landmark victory for Second Amendment freedom in the United States."
The Republican presidential hopeful criticized his rival Barack Obama's stance on the issue, saying the Democrat had refused to sign a statement calling for Thursday's ruling.
"Unlike the elitist view that believes Americans cling to guns out of bitterness, today's ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right — sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly," McCain said.
The White House also praised the ruling.
"We are pleased by the Court's decision upholding Americans right to bear arms. We look forward to reading the ruling in detail," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.
Capital's strict gun law
The capital's gun law was among the nation's strictest.
Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller's favor and struck down Washington's handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.
The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.

Click for related content
Supreme Court guide 2007-2008 (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24556215/)

Scalia said nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."
The law adopted by Washington's city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.
Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSWBT00928420080626

And they ruled correctly too. Imagine that.

Good, now when somebody rapes a kid, you can shoot em! (Cause the courts liked that one???)

Wonder what R.Daley and the others are thinking now ? :D

Well, I'm not a big Gun freak, but I like to keep a few around. You would think people would have noticed a long time ago that without the right to bear arms, we as the people are truely defenseless. Just throw me a 10-22 Ruger with hollow-points and I can do some damage...:)

My fear is that it was only a 5 to 4 victory! That is too close.

My fear is that it was only a 5 to 4 victory! That is too close.

Exactly! That is my main concern.. my question to the 4 justices is what part of the second amendmendment don't you understand????:mad:


While I'm happy part of our bill of rights was protected..I'm very concerned..We should NOT have to be defending our Constitution every year!!!!

That should have been a 9 to Zip vote!

Now think ahead 1 year...and the possibility that Barack Obama is president and has appointed 1 or 2 liberal justices..We would lose our second amendment right!

These four justices need to be hammered as to why they voted against the second amendement of the "Bill of Rights" inwhich they swore an oath to uphold and protect.

If congress ever had a need to hold a congressional hearing..it's these four they should be questioning! ..We citizens should be questioning them as well!!!! :mad:

If congress ever had a need to hold a congressional hearing..it's these four they should be questioning! ..We citizens should be questioning them as well!!!!
As opposed to the Senate grilling baseball players to see if they've been using steroids?

Remember this fall, support the party that supports the rest of the Bill of Rights.

Remember this fall, support the party that supports the rest of the Bill of Rights.

Right on Libatarian or constitution party all the way!


Don't forget how the Republitards and the Democraps have trampled and wiped their butts with all our other rights.

Wonder what R.Daley and the others are thinking now ? :D
I heard his response was "Over my dead body."

Right on Libatarian or constitution party all the way!


Don't forget how the Republitards and the Democraps have trampled and wiped their butts with all our other rights.


If a lot of people have the mind set and vote the way you suggest, then you can guarantee our next president will be Barack Hussein Obama...

As opposed to the Senate grilling baseball players to see if they've been using steroids?

Bingo! Yes among other ignorant things they "Investigate"

I have already heard on the news our Govener is speaking out against the ruling...hahahaha Ain't nothin he can do about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:D:p

I have already heard on the news our Govener is speaking out against the ruling...hahahaha Ain't nothin he can do about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:D:p
It won't matter to him anyway once he's sharing a room with his predecessor.

If a lot of people have the mind set and vote the way you suggest, then you can guarantee our next president will be Barack Hussein Obama...

If more people were involved in their gov't beyond campaign commercials, it would be different. Your vote is a voice, make it heard whatever party you choose to support!

I have never voted for a winning president...:cool:, and I probably won't this election either... I'll probably vote libertarian, or for good ol Ralph Nader...:D

I choose not to pick the lesser of 2 evils...:confused:

Just saw Mayor Daley on this mornings news, He is madder than a hornet! :)

I heard his response was "Over my dead body."


That'd be a dream come true!

I like the way Glenn McCoy put it.

http://picayune.uclick.com/comics/gm/2008/gm080627.gif

mcCoy is the best cartoonist i've seen. these clowns that voted no would rather save the useless lives of child rapists than allow law abiding citizens to save their own life. the libertarians sound great until they start talking foreign policiy, then they become complete kooks. still might be better than the 2 leftwingers runing for pres though. daley is a jacka$$. how has his chicago gun ban been working out? every city that has a gun ban has a sustancially higher rate of violent gun crimes than cities that don't. some people just don't want to deal with facts. the blame for chicago's gun crime lies squarely on him because he refuses to do anything about it.

http://www.bnd.com/326/story/382175.html

Gun advocates: City's gun ban won't hold up.

Yep, they've already started the lawsuit against Chicago to get their gun laws overturned.

Remember this fall, support the party that supports the rest of the Bill of Rights.


And can win!

http://www.bnd.com/326/story/382175.html

Gun advocates: City's gun ban won't hold up.

Yep, they've already started the lawsuit against Chicago to get their gun laws overturned.

Now lets also aim a little higher and go for CCW rights in IL:D

I am glad the court decided the way it did, but I woudl really like to read the dissenting opinion and see why they decided the way they did. Anyone who has studied constitutional law will tell you that they may not have been in a complete thought that the 2nd amendment doesn't apply to individuals. Giving them a little bit of credit I am thinking they may agree that individuals have a right to own guns but maybe some types of guns can be banned by states or local governments (ie: the way it has been but not an outright ban on everything that goes boom).

Like I said I am glad they decided the way they did but I am very interested in reading the dissenting opinion, even moreso that the majority.

If a lot of people have the mind set and vote the way you suggest, then you can guarantee our next president will be Barack Hussein Obama...

If a lot of people had my mindset we would actually be free and wouldn't put up with all this BS. I'm not voting for the lesser of two evils I'm voting what is right.

If more people were involved in their gov't beyond campaign commercials, it would be different. Your vote is a voice, make it heard whatever party you choose to support!

I have never voted for a winning president...:cool:, and I probably won't this election either... I'll probably vote libertarian, or for good ol Ralph Nader...:D

I choose not to pick the lesser of 2 evils...:confused:

Whats really sad is I don't believe anyone's vote counts because I think corruption is so deep none of the votes matter. I"m believe the president is already decided.

Whats really sad is I don't believe anyone's vote counts because I think corruption is so deep none of the votes matter. I"m believe the president is already decided.
I don't think it's quite that bad, though there are some counties where their vote is already predetermined. Two of those counties are here in Illannoy.

For anyone with the time to read it, here's the entire decision. This includes dissenting opinions.

http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/HellerOpinion.pdf

Exactly! That is my main concern.. my question to the 4 justices is what part of the second amendmendment don't you understand????:mad:


While I'm happy part of our bill of rights was protected..I'm very concerned..We should NOT have to be defending our Constitution every year!!!!

That should have been a 9 to Zip vote!

Now think ahead 1 year...and the possibility that Barack Obama is president and has appointed 1 or 2 liberal justices..We would lose our second amendment right!

These four justices need to be hammered as to why they voted against the second amendement of the "Bill of Rights" inwhich they swore an oath to uphold and protect.

If congress ever had a need to hold a congressional hearing..it's these four they should be questioning! ..We citizens should be questioning them as well!!!! :mad:
How has Barack Obama got this far in the process of Presidential candidate?
The Democrat Party is not what it use to be! They are anti-EVERYTHING anymore! I just can't vote there anymore.

How has Barack Obama got this far in the process of Presidential candidate?
The Democrat Party is not what it use to be! They are anti-EVERYTHING anymore! I just can't vote there anymore.

Amen!.....

Whew.. .just got done reading the dissenting opinions.
At least they didn't ourtight say that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to us having firearms. They did say however that the self defense in the home while not linked to the 2nd amendment does fall under other presumptions in the law (such as protection of hearth and home and the castle doctrine).

Basically what I got out of the dissenting opinions is that as the law stood it was OK, it did not ban all firearms just those that the city deemed were unsafe to the well being and preservation of the safety of it's citizens, for reasons such as falling into the wrong hands, theft, or the matter of convenience that handguns have (due to their design) in relation to the commision of crimes......... In simple words things are fine the way they are.

Not that I agree with them but they could have said that common, non-military law abiding citizens have absolutely no right to own a firearm.

Not that I agree with them but they could have said that common, non-military law abiding citizens have absolutely no right to own a firearm.


That's why we have the 2nd Amendment!!!!

Thomas Jefferson wrote in his papers: "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

Total Gun Control = Total Tyranny! (http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_ronning_011003_guncontrol.html)

Yup, proven by Adolf Hitler in 1939 midway through the 1940's.

Gun rights at this time in history are difficult as the division has grown deeper in separation due to more individuals growing up with hunting for meat being the difference between the price at IGA, Save-A-Lot or Super Wal-Mart. I think many of those SILOutdoors members have grown up around firearms or lived in the country were it is almost a requirement to own a gun. (Why, protection by local authorities - county or state police -is a 1 to 2 hour wait and I am not joking. I have had to wait 1 hour during a serious situation.)

I do feel that every trained individual of sound mind and body should be allowed the use of a firearm in their place of residence for self-preservation.

Like I said previously, many of SIL members have lived each day with a firearm and clearly understand how to handle a firearm. They respect the fact that mistakes with a firearm cannot be reversed and do not point them at anything they do not plan to shoot. They do not load them until they plan to shoot it either. They understand these are weapons and not toys like shown on TV.

Now to get to my point.
In Illinois if an individual wants to purchase a firearm all they need to do is fill out 5 questions on a piece of paper and then send it it with money they get in return a piece of paper that says they can have a gun. (Think about this, if this was done with drivers licenses a 16 yr old would fill out 5 questions about themselves on a piece of paper and mail a check to the state and get a drivers license. Without any experience or training they could go down the road by themselves immediately after getting that piece of paper.) This is difficult to comprehend until you realize that if you want to hunt an animal in Illinois you are required to take a Illinois Hunter Safety Training course that teaches you how about guns, animals, and the law.
Reality of how scary this is sets in if you ever go to a shooting range or gun shoot and one of these individuals pulls out their new gun and starts pointing it like they are some gangsters, they then shut the chamber (you tense up -pucker factor - and you get this funny feeling). Then they start shooting and they leave the chamber closed cause then think its empty since the last time they pulled the trigger it didn't fire so they feel it must be empty. They then swing the gun and it points at you.

They ignorant must be trained, the stupid must be restricted.

I'm all for training Debunk. I got years of it from Dad when I was growing up (as did most other SIL members as you pointed out) then several more from the military. I guarantee they wouldn't hold a handgun gangsta style more than once on a military firing rang. Something about eating dirt from a range officer shoving your face in the ground just gets your attention. Like dad always drilled in our heads, if you don't plan to shoot it, don't point your gun at it.

With this in mind, do you support schools offering hunter training classes much as they do drivers' training with certified instructors?

Debunk I do not disagree one bit on this statement of yours as I have experienced it first hand on many occasions:
Reality of how scary this is sets in if you ever go to a shooting range or gun shoot and one of these individuals pulls out their new gun and starts pointing it like they are some gangsters, they then shut the chamber (you tense up -pucker factor - and you get this funny feeling). Then they start shooting and they leave the chamber closed cause then think its empty since the last time they pulled the trigger it didn't fire so they feel it must be empty. They then swing the gun and it points at you.


Ironically I see it more from adults than I do younger kids with adults, and what's sad is while we are in the field at the hunting club the dad's are talking about how junior just passed the hunters safety course and while he is saying this he isn't paying a bit of attention to where the gun barrel is pointed. Once a guy handed me an extra $20 just for being so safety concious and reminding him of his gun barrel. Most kids take the reminder to heart and pay attention, most adults are offended.

There is no way I would ever trust a mechanical safety on a firearm, I know to well how they are designed and what it takes for the gun to go boom.

Debunk I do not disagree one bit on this statement of yours as I have experienced it first hand on many occasions:


Ironically I see it more from adults than I do younger kids with adults, and what's sad is while we are in the field at the hunting club the dad's are talking about how junior just passed the hunters safety course and while he is saying this he isn't paying a bit of attention to where the gun barrel is pointed. Once a guy handed me an extra $20 just for being so safety concious and reminding him of his gun barrel. Most kids take the reminder to heart and pay attention, most adults are offended.

There is no way I would ever trust a mechanical safety on a firearm, I know to well how they are designed and what it takes for the gun to go boom.

I was thinking about it one day and there are so many ways for a safety to not help since most long gun safeties only stop the trigger and do nothing to prevent the firing pin from striking. On revolvers that have the transfer plate over the firing pin, if you ever look inside a revolver that isn't too hard to disable, but then the plate doesn't even rise so it's somewhat better. With pistols though there is still no great safety, Glock has the system that leaves it half cocked after each shot (except last), but still I wouldn't trust it, just too afraid of being used as a statistic by anti-gun groups and the risk of injury, lawsuit, bills, etc.

Also about the barrel pointing thing, my dad drills that into our heads if he ever sees us doing it while hunting to the point I check where I'm pointing the barrel automatically, didn't like being yelled at, but glad my dad did/does (I slip up when we jump a bird:o).

Wolf the way many safeties are built they simply block the trigger from moving. The safety mechanism on most of them are fail safe, I would bet on most that the trigger will not move if everything is in place, but that doesn't mean it can't fire. A spring can break that holds the sear locked in place and it will fire. If you doubt me drive down here and I can show you on two of my rifles how it will do this by a few internal adjustments. Ever heard of a slam fire?

As for the barrel pinting direction, I carry my shotgun afield and it points every which way, constantly changing directions to avoid people or dogs, all of which are in different places in the field.

Wolf the way many safeties are built they simply block the trigger from moving. The safety mechanism on most of them are fail safe, I would bet on most that the trigger will not move if everything is in place, but that doesn't mean it can't fire. A spring can break that holds the sear locked in place and it will fire. If you doubt me drive down here and I can show you on two of my rifles how it will do this by a few internal adjustments. Ever heard of a slam fire?

As for the barrel pinting direction, I carry my shotgun afield and it points every which way, constantly changing directions to avoid people or dogs, all of which are in different places in the field.

Yeah, I've heard of slamfiring before, but with semi-autos only, but when I looked for videos found out pump shotguns that don't require you to release the trigger do it too, kind of interesting (but now I want to see if an 870 or BPS will do it).

They all can and will, I have done it on two bolt action rifles.

Got a couple updates to a couple city gun control laws here in Illinois. These were posted on the 18th.

Evanston Votes To Amend Gun Ban-Tries To Avoid NRA Lawsuit: (http://www.ilaalerts.org/UM/T.asp?A1.2.3404.7.3352137) Unlike the debacle in Washington, D.C., in the wake of the Supreme Court's Heller decision and in an effort to avoid NRA's lawsuit against their city aldermen in the Chicago suburb of Evanston unanimously voted to amend the city's 27-year-old handgun ban at a recent closed-door meeting.

Village Of Morton Grove To Repeal Gun Ban: (http://www.ilaalerts.org/UM/T.asp?A1.2.3404.8.3352137) Today the Village of Morton Grove also moved to avoid protracted legal action by amending its Village Code to remove the current handgun ban and incorporate sections of the Illinois Criminal Code, following the filing of NRA's lawsuit against the city.

I still get a chuckle (or warm fuzzy feeling) everytime I rethink Mayor Daley's "Over my dead body" comment (referring to repealing the handgun ban in the State of Chicago).