High court strikes down gun ban

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/26/scotus.guns/index.html

(CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a sweeping ban on handguns in the nation's capital violated the Second Amendment right to bear arms

The justices voted 5-4 against the ban, with Justice Antonin Scalia writing the opinion for the majority.

At issue in District of Columbia v. Heller was whether Washington's ban violated the right to "keep and bear arms" by preventing individuals -- as opposed to state militias -- from having guns in their homes.

"Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security and where gun violence is a serious problem," Scalia wrote. "That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct."

Scalia was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, who are all considered conservative voices on the court. Justice Anthony Kennedy, often seen as a swing vote, also joined the majority.

District of Columbia officials argued they had the responsibility to impose "reasonable" weapons restrictions to reduce violent crime, but several Washingtonians challenged the 32-year-old law. Some said they had been constant victims of crimes and needed guns for protection

March, two women went before the justices with starkly different opinions on the handgun ban.

Shelly Parker told the court she is a single woman who has been threatened by drug dealers in her Washington neighborhood.

"In the event that someone does get in my home, I would have no defense, except maybe throw my paper towels at them," she said, explaining she told police she had an alarm, bars on her windows and a dog.

"What more am I supposed to do?" Parker recalled asking authorities. "The police turned to me and said, 'Get a gun.' " See how proponents, opponents argued »

Elilta "Lily" Habtu, however, told the high court that she supports the handgun ban, and tighter gun control in general. Habtu was in a Virginia Tech classroom in April 2007 when fellow student Seung-Hui Cho burst in and began shooting. She survived bullets to the head and arm.

"There has to be tighter gun control; we can't let another Virginia Tech to happen," she told the court. "And we're just not doing it; we're sitting around; we're doing nothing. We let the opportunity arise for more massacres."

In March 2007, a federal appeals court overturned the ban, which keeps most private citizens from owning handguns and keeping them in their homes.

It was the first time a federal appeals court ruled a gun law unconstitutional on Second Amendment grounds.

City attorneys urged the high court to intervene, warning, "The District of Columbia -- a densely populated urban locality where the violence caused by handguns is well-documented -- will be unable to enforce a law that its elected officials have sensibly concluded saves lives."

There were 143 gun-related murders in Washington last year, compared with 135 in 1976, when the handgun ban was enacted.

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."

The wording repeatedly has raised the question of whether gun ownership is an individual right, or a collective one pertaining to state militias and therefore subject to regulation.

In an Opinion Research Corp. poll of 1,035 adult Americans this month, 67 percent of those surveyed said they felt the Second Amendment gave individuals the right to own guns. Thirty percent said it provided citizens the right to form a militia. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. See poll results »

The Supreme Court has avoided the question since the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. The high court last examined the issue in 1939 but stayed away from the broad constitutional question.

Only Chicago, Illinois, has a handgun ban as sweeping as Washington's, though Maryland, Massachusetts and San Francisco, California, joined the Windy City in issuing briefs supporting the district's ban.

The National Rifle Association, Disabled Veterans for Self-Defense and the transgender group Pink Pistols -- along with 31 states -- filed briefs supporting the District of Columbia's gun owners.

In February, a majority of U.S. congressmen -- 55 senators and 250 representatives -- filed a brief urging the Supreme Court to strike down Washington's ordinance.





WOOOT! i am kinda suprised it was struck down. though it was close. a vote of 5-4 is pretty damn close.

I figure within the next 15 years it will be reversed though. i figured it would be with this one.

but damn good news!
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,389
8,547
126
iirc, the VT guy violated several gun bans anyway
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,231
118
116
<-- P&N

Let's not start this crap in OT again; got me all hot and bothered yesterday. :D

KT
 

Away

Diamond Member
May 1, 2005
4,430
1
71
I would just like to congratulate everyone in the Washington D.C. area.
 
Dec 26, 2007
11,782
2
76
Originally posted by: ElFenix
iirc, the VT guy violated several gun bans anyway

QFT

All bans and laws like this do is help to prevent law abiding citizens from exercising rights to protect themself (and their familys/property). It is the same as DMCA, where I cannot legally backup my DVD's in case the real ones get damaged.

People that want to obtain a gun and go on a killing spree, or people that want to illegally download movies, will do so regardless of a law saying it's illegal. They will find ways around it either way, so the only people these laws really hurt are the people who follow the law IMHO.
 

AmpedSilence

Platinum Member
Oct 7, 2005
2,749
1
76
It would be awesome to see the murder rate drop exponentially now that this is passed. Probably will drop a little, but not enough to be considered meaningful.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Woop woop!
I'm all for gun control, but banning gun isn't the answer. For every Cho there are 1000 law abiding people that want to protect themselves.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Was there a dissenting opinion written? That'd be interesting to read as well.
 
T

Tim

Originally posted by: AmpedSilence
It would be awesome to see the murder rate drop exponentially now that this is passed. Probably will drop a little, but not enough to be considered meaningful.

:confused: Did you even read the article? Or the topic of the post when you clicked it, for that matter.