U.S. Supreme Court Takes Up Gun-Rights Case

maybe it will turn out like canadian gun controll.....
billions spent
80% or higher non compliance
and ooodles of unregistered firearms.....
and our country hasnt got anywhere close to the guns the american public does....

good luck

There has to be a clear definition for "well organized militia". Nobody can argue once that happens. Is this what the Supreme Court is going to decide on, a definition? Is that their job? Would that decision change each state's laws?

It may seem simple, but that definition will prove who has this right.

reply to post by NJ Mooch

The militia are "The People" as told by the men who wrote and framed the documents, The courts are going to have to rule on who "The People" are as well... A can of worms because when they do this it won't only effect the 2A, but many other individual rights as well...


The conspiracy side of me asks myself, was this can of worms opened for a reason well beyond that of guns.


I understand your points how ever as to how they may interpret the issues at hand, but wrong is wrong and ruling in favor of the status quo when the status quo has deviated well beyond the intent of the constitution is unconstitutional.

[edit on 20-11-2007 by C0le]

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.

There is not “interpretation”, you just read the Bill of Rights the way that it is worded. The Supreme Court deciding on its own to “interpret” the law is just an excuse to claim the false authority to change the law.

The reason this case is being presented before the Supreme Court is because the “people” of the District of Columbia have had their constitutional right “infringed upon” against the law.

When whatever body of representatives first passed the laws that have taken away our rights, the people should have demanded that, not only should their rights be restored, but that those who had forcibly removed the peoples rights should have been hanged in the center of town.

Yes that’s right, hanged in the center of town. If any Supreme court judge decided as well to take away our constitutional rights by “interpretation” then they should be hanged in the public square as well.

They do not have the power to “interpret” what is written in our constitution. No. We have lost this country my friends. We have lost it for sure, and only when the people once again band together and demand their rights back will we ever get back even an inkling of the peace and properity that our forefathers enjoyed.

It is past time that most of us joined a new political party and demanded change from our representative. It is past time that we demand accountability from those who we give power too. They do not have power, no, it is we who have the power.

We must band together for what is right and join a new party that will take action against these forces of coruption and evil that now dominate our political system.

[edit on 20-11-2007 by Hot_Wings]

I thought that Bush change the role of the military in our homeland during the Katrina emergency when he deploy military personnel in Louisiana.

Plus since the Iraqi war the national guard role has been redefined.

My friends, do you not see the bigger issue here with our gun rights? Our gun rights are just one of ten listed in the bill of rights. The right of free speech, the right of public assembly, ect ect.

If we allow them to “interpret” away our second amendment rights, then there is nothing to stop them from “interpreting” away the entire Bill of Rights. We must support the entire Bill of Rights, and not let a single right be taken away. If we do not support the second amendment, then all of our rights under the constitution will be under question.

Do you not see what is happening in Venezuela? Do you not see what has happened in Pakistan? These countries were democracies, but record time, they have now been turned into dictatorships. This happened because the people did not stand up for their rights, and the truth.

Support the Right to keep and bear arms, or else it is only a matter of time before you have no rights at all. It really is that important.

You are right my friend, they are constantly giving more power to the military and to our elected officials. At the same time they are trying to remove yours. Don't you see where this is headed? It is headed toward dictatorship and the enslavement of our country.

Originally posted by marg6043
This is new to me!!!!!!!!!!!!! I had not idea that the people in DC have their second amendment taken away

We have had ours taken away in Chicago too. You can't have a gun in this city unless you register it (Fascist) and they will not register handguns and most other guns. At best you'll be lucky if you can get a pump shotgun registered. So most people just don't even try to register them.

Then if the cops go into your house for anything they search it, and when they find your guns you get charged with pos. of an illegal firearm. And that's a felony, so guess what boys and girls then you loose your gun rights in Il. forever.

reply to post by lazy1981


One thing I do not understand is how in the world or in this nation people has allowed the government to take away their rights.

That is why the people is guarantee to over power the government including at the state level.

Sorry but when I learn about things like this I wonder, where are the people and why they did not used their powers.

Government is just a fraction compare to the citizens.

reply to post by NJ Mooch


To my understanding a militia is not a regular millitary unit , therefore the Gov. of a State would not supply arms and would have to be provided by the citizens as individuals. Which would entail us having an individual right to arms.
Furthermors it says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."

People- The citizens of the USA

Keep- retain, or keep in possession/own

Bear-to be equipped or furnished with. AKA to carry or be in physical possession of.

Originally posted by apc
reply to post by C0le

 

If there were still WATS...


It's times like these that I'm glad I live in what was a Confederate state. Missouri recently completely repealed the requirement to obtain a permit to purchase even a handgun. Here, we now have a law explicitly prohibiting the Government from confiscating our weapons in times of emergency. And yes, even a toddler can own a rifle.

If the Court rules in favor of the enemies to freedom, I think that whole secession thing might be worth another look.

Amen to that!!! This time it will be for a better cause. Hopefully Illinois will have the good sense to do so.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by lazy1981

 

One thing I do not understand is how in the world or in this nation people has allowed the government to take away their rights.

People are fat and happy, most are too bussy watching BET, MTV, and HBO. Besides they don't want to stick out,"The nail that sticks out gets hammered down."

Government is just a fraction compare to the citizens.

But they can realy screw your life up.

Originally posted by marg6043
I thought that Bush change the role of the military in our homeland during the Katrina emergency when he deploy military personnel in Louisiana.

Plus since the Iraqi war the national guard role has been redefined.

The President has no legal right to issue these "Presidential Directives" under the Constitution.

I will kindly refer everyone here to the old "School House Rock I'm Just a Bill" that we all watched as kids. It sure did tell you how law is made didn't it.

There is a process and it sure wasn't followed in regard to "Military in the Homeland" or was there?

Oh yeah, Posse Comitatus. Prohibiting the Armed Forces from police work............

If I see a helmit weather it's US or UN blue on American streets I say, "OPEN FIRE!!!!!"

If our soldiers obey an unlawfull order then they have dishonored themselves, their country, and the Armed Forces. And have become gastapo, and deserve nothing less.

BBC NEWS

US Supreme Court ponders gun law

Handguns are used in most US assaults and robberies
The US Supreme Court is to consider an American's right to bear arms for the first time in nearly 70 years.
It has agreed to rule on whether a ban on handguns by the city of Washington, DC complies with the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.

The US capital has banned handguns since 1976.

The case is expected to be heard next spring, with a ruling in summer, and therefore could influence the presidential election in November.

The Supreme Court will consider a case brought by a Washington resident, Dick Heller, against his city council, arguing that he should be allowed to keep a handgun for his own protection.

The case was initially rejected, but a federal appeals court later overturned that judgement.

The city of Washington asked the Supreme Court to rule on the case, and on Tuesday it said it would - the first time it will have ruled on the divisive Second Amendment since 1939.

High murder rate

The Second Amendment states: "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 powerful gun lobby says this guarantees that citizens may bear arms, and is vehemently imposed to restrictions on that right.

But states which wish to impose gun control measures argue that it only means a "militia", ie a modern-day police force, is entitled to be armed.

A lawyer for Mr Heller and other Washington residents said: "We believe the Supreme Court will acknowledge that, while the use of guns can be regulated, a complete prohibition on all functional firearms is too extreme.

"It's time to restore a basic freedom to all Washington residents."

Washington council maintained: "Whatever right the Second Amendment guarantees, it does not require the district to stand by while its citizens die."

With gun crime endemic in the US, the issue provokes heated argument. Some blame guns for the problem, while others say they are the best way to protect themselves against violence.

Handguns are used in two-thirds of robberies and assaults and in half of murders in the US, according to statistics from the Federal Bureau of Investigations.

But supporters of gun rights point out that having one of the toughest laws in the US has not stopped Washington being one of its most murder-ridden cities - with 169 killings in 2006.

Gun control is not just about gun control. It is also about mind control.

You see, they all ready have you believing that your constitutional rights should be questioned. They all ready have you thinking that owning and carrying a gun is wrong. Why? It is because that is the first step in gaining complete control of a society.

Modern television and movies and so called professors at colleges have all ready planted the seeds of doubt in you about your own legal rights under the law. Why do they not say instead, “That is our constitution, our only firm document guaranteeing our freedom, do not change it!”

No, instead they only claim that the freedom of the press is the only right of the constitution that should not be changed. And yet they constantly use that freedom to attack our other freedoms. It is no accident my friends, it is the methodical plotting of evil people to gain control of our government.

The first step has always been gaining control of the press, second is using the press to attack the laws that enable true freedom, that of weapons and self defense. The third is after taking away your right to self defense is taking away your right to public assembly. That’s when tanks start running over people in the street because they know that you have no means to fight back.

After that then all your rights are quickly taken from you and the media is the last thing to change. Instead of CNN or Fox news it then becomes the information ministry.

Do you want to know why it is that you have never studied the evils of communism in your college or high school? The Soviet Union was our biggest enemy for decades, and yet, you never questioned why you never learned about the evils of communism in college? World War Two was the largest military engagement of our country and yet no one is ever taught about it in college or high school.

These are no accidents my friends, they are planned events. History teaches us this. For when you instruct the populous about the manner of warfare and the nature of your enemy then what you are instructing them with is weapons that can then be used against the state.

Warfare is a necessary matter of state. That is why it is not taught in college. They do not want you to know anything that will make you independent and free in thought. If you knew about the evils of communism then you could not readily believe whatever they decided to tell you about it, now would you. If you understood the matters of warfare then you would have known why our mission in Iraq has gone so poorly wouldn’t you?

Everything that is important in our world is never taught in our schools. Religion, warfare, political ideology, none of it is taught in school. But yet, our enemies teach these things almost exclusively. Did you ever ask yourself why? It is because if you understood these things better, then you wouldn’t be able to be hoodwinked by those in control of the media about current events.

Even now, we fight Islamic based terrorism, and yet you never hear about the true tenants of the religion that these terrorist attacks are based upon? Did you ever wonder why? It is because they do not want you to truly understand our enemies, because if you did, then you would not as readily accept the proposals that they have decided for you in these matters.

They want you to be weak. They want you to be stupid about matters of importance. They want you to be fat and lazy and never wanting for more freedom or information. They want you to be complacent. They want you to be ignorant about your rights and freedoms. They want you to be ignorant about the law.

They want all this because they want power over you. They want total control.


[edit on 21-11-2007 by Hot_Wings]

I hestitate to post. As far as I can remember and with all of this big picture subject, it boils down to this...........(and since I can not say anymore for sure, I guess it must be now my opinion although I am sure that I heard this many years ago -- like when Israel put up first fighting another war back in 1967..............).....................

This world is headed according to some towards N-war, and since it is mentioned in The Bible, and foreign Countries are like they are............

We here in this Republic (meaning those you Elect) see no future except to make you think that you should be more peaceful and show it~!

(Now first about The Bible and any of that -- in my opinion it is The Book that tells society how to live mainly and how that can be intelligent -- instead of the opposite -- having Armageddon -- whoa but what - that is only Humans on this insignificant speck of a Planet in a very large Universe -- so where are the spacealiens and all of that also, since they to me assume that spacealiens will not be so different as humans and also really want to live in Peace in the end. Big Assumption in my opinion that can not be verified, but only thought about in the imagination of the future. In my my opinion The Bible can also be a Warning Type of Book. Either way -- it is a Big Assumption in any debate anyway. So if The Bible is really the Book that tells the Truth, then it can not be averted anyway. No matter what they think of what may become the future -- I think The Lord stated that through Free Will -- it can be Adverted. Now, according to them that is what they are -- I guess doing. I tend to really not know so, I will just say -- I do not know, I do not tell the future or pretend to know the future. But, if I had my opinion -- how they are going about it for one -- means to assume that you know that the Lord intended to tell you what Armageddon really means. I prefer to think of it as being different than what they think and they neither really know the time nor the place as The Lord stated. You will not know the time nor the place. That is what is stated.)

Now back to what is going on and has been going on. There are people and many people who have families who live in the Fear of this being the time and the place of Armageddon -- or having an N-War. I prefer to think of The Lord giving us Free Will and that means that Humans can actually think better because it is between The Lord and the Individual at least in my opinion not between The Lord and All Individuals necessarily.

The Lord also stated Not to Live in Fear except with/between God, and to seek Forgiveness and Pray and Repent. Now to other websites that think that The Devil is running the show in this world, and that N-day will happen anyway, because People have actually turned away from God, and are in a sense dictating to God when they think N-Day will be -- as if they really know or knew. I doubt they could even prove it anyway.

So, that to me is what is going on. That they think people will see this world heading that way and you will want it not to happen. Now to the Second Amendment -- see what the answer will be. That is what it will be.

I simply refuse to live in Fear of Humans because I think if God exist, I see no reason like those websites that think The Devil is in control, to not be in Fear of God, instead of Humans. Head for the Hills! I think this messing around with the Premise of this Country is what is making it happen. I see no other Country ready to give up its Country in order to say that there Will Be Peace Then in the future. No, I see this Country stating something like Preemptive Strike -- which to me - would be something that would cause this Armageddon they so Boldly Display that they Assume that They have Knowledge About. (but like anyone else can not prove.)

So, some people call it their Adversity only the thing that is going on, and that no Country in this World is going to change anytime soon except to bicker on and on, and go on like this for quite a number of years anyway.

That is their opinion, and I sort of gave mine, although there is a Fear of a Human, Humans are supposed to follow Jesus Christ Laws not Fear Mongering and going on about God and when it all sinks into the ground because of what Governments Do on this Planet. I sure would not comunicate the way that the political parties do communicate if I ever wanted real Peace on this Planet. I would convince others that it is very important but as such I can not place any value on this Elected Officials and the way that they do Think in this Country anymore. They to me simply can not communicate in a way that reminds me that they even really know what The Bible is all about, let alone the others. It seems to be Tit-for-Tat kind of philosophy that is only mentioned in the Old Testament and has nothing to do with the New Testament and being a real Christian by Definition in a Dictionary. Look it Up!

So, I think you can see what outcome this case in the Supreme Court will have, and any opinion that I may give on this subject will I guess not be communicated since I prefer to think that the decision has already been made by the People who are Elected in this Country -- because I think they think that they either are God or Jesus - and I see no evidence that they know anything that will happen in the future either. It tends to me that it seems a negative view all the time, and then where is the positiveness of actually thinking a different way and communicating a different way besides the way that these Elected People do Communicate.
I have computer games that seem smarter than what they seem to be to me, but I do not give IQ tests either or pretend to be an Expert like some other people will claim to be. I think God and Jesus are the Expert and one has to really Think to know Jesus or God. That is what The Bible really States, and anyone else stating they know God -- has to really be questioned and not just quote things out of any version of The Bible. I think that they are all Liberals and when that happens the World will have a War. I think that is what The Bible states to me - in my opinion. Without Repentence and being somewhat Fearful of the Thinking I think in my opinion that they are really not thinking any better than I can think. I did not say smarter, or intelligent design (which bug bites who - intelligent?) wise so, so I will leave it there.

Oh well, we all saw this coming. They have to rob all Americans of their rights to bear arms, so they can take full control of us.

Here it is! I just dont see what more evidence ANYONE would need at this point, do you?

We're just a hop skip away from dictatorship and some still think nothing of all of this.

They will make you an offer you cant refuse, and you will have to give up your arms to the government. I dont own any but if i want one, i want to be able to get one.

How will they gain control over the masses? Well, this, for starters.

Also, remember, any mention of that old piece of paper, that Constitution, is going to get ya jail time also.

The US constitution is a very strong document in legal structure terms.

The "bill of Rights" is really untouchable, without redefining the meaning of America

Although many are fearful of directives set in motion by the BUSH administration, these directives have not changed the constitution or any interpretation of it.

The directives are an extra layer of legal contrivance that must be addressed by a court before moving forward to the constitution for an ultimate decision. Many directives have been overturned at the district level.

Any overturning or reinterpretation of any of the top 10 amendments would signal the end of the constitution as originally designed, which until every one is completely hypnotized will not go over well ,..especially near an election.

of course if the "fix is in" for 2008 maybe there is some fear that the people will rise up and....give cause for the president to invoke martial law and the constitution suspended,..so that's not a good idea. Once martial law is imposed the president can use the military against any well armed citizen militias, and they have bigger guns.

This is just a smoke screen, they would love for a citizen based revolt to fuel their efforts of controlled management

if they really wanted to f gun owners they would just make ammunition illegal, bullets are not covered by the 2nd Amendment, they did not have bullets in 1789 dooh !

The 2nd amendment is already dead..................The day the "court" allowed laws to stand that keep gun ownership away from "criminals" the "right to keep an bear arms" died. The constitution does not say..."the right to keep an bear arms except criminals". Once criminality enters the equation, then everyone can and will be criminals. Gun ownership is lost. Soon it is just "military" or national guard. Criminals were around when the 2nd amendment was written, the fathers never forsaw the lack of enforcement or law by an insane PC staff inside the gov.

This gov is already screwing the american "citizens" and when guns are gone its really over. make no mistake this case will take guns away...............

reply to post by NWRHINO


Precisely! The Supreme Court is being called upon to judge whether or not one particular DC resident has been denied his Constitution Right to bear arms. Logically, WE can see that his Second Amendment right has been taken from him. The question is whether the Supreme Court judges will act on the U.S. Constitution as-it-stands, or whether they will 'interpret' our Second Amendment and change the meaning and intent of our Constitutional Rights as declared in our Bill of Rights.

As another poster said, to permit current day Judges the right to 'interpret' our original laws is not just dangerous for our present society, but is wrong. And this gives cause to examine Amendment 19: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

To get at the very core of what is being discussed or 'interpreted', review the introduction to the US Constitution, which reads:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The Bill of Rights, aka the Constitutional Amendments, serve as a list of rights, also viewed as immunities, for individual citizens. The Bill of Rights were written for individuals, as a means of personal preservation and "protection".


The entire reason that the Bill of Rights was formulated was because individual rights were not specified in the US Constitution. The Preamble to the Bill of Rights states:
The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

Here's the National Archive transcript for the Bill of Rights

As K0le has pointed out, the framers of the US Constitution had not only thought the legal implications through, but the general sentiments are well documented (thanks for posting those). When James Madison drafted the amendments to the Constitution that were to become the Bill of Rights, he drew heavily upon the ideas put forth in the Virginia Declaration of Rights.

Section 13 of the Virginia Declaration states:
That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

Any Supreme Court "interpretation" of these words will show direct intent to control the population of the United States. And I don't believe I will be the only person who will rise to THAT situation.