[rjh200]

This is a big one coming from the supreme court!

Court says individuals have right to own guns - Crime & courts - MSNBC.com

"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.

cont. . . . "

[dhuze]

Originally Posted by 04ZRX

That only pertains to the DC area. Not Taxachusetts.

That pertains to the constitution and the 2nd amendment. D.C. is just the worst offender.

If the people of Massachusetts would do something half of their laws wouldn not exist.

[spydah]

Well no DUH! When did they figure that out? Did they just now look at the 2nd amendment of the US constition for the first time in their careers?

Would this be so surprising if it said "Court says individuals have right to speak freely"?

BTW, the 2nd amendment was not designed for self defense. Keep in mind when it was written... shortly after America gained independance. It was designed to empower the people to be able to keep the government straight. "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. " Does that sound like self defense?

The government continues to use "self defense" as the reason the eliminate certain classifications of firearms, when in fact, using "self defense" as leverage is anti-constitutional. There is no good reason (according to the constition) that Americans should not have access to any gun.

[ZX-12R]

Originally Posted by rjh200

The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns...

It's scarry that it was that close.

[rjh200]

The question now is will this set a precedent for future lawsuits.

"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. "

Does this bring into question a States right to limit what guns are available for purchase legally in that state? That is basically the case here in that DC made handguns illegal.

[ChR1s]

Can't buy anything new besides a Ruger or S&W in MA? You can thank Scott Harshburger.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/mics1.pdf

[joeswamp]

Originally Posted by rjh200

Does this bring into question a States right to limit what guns are available for purchase legally in that state? That is basically the case here in that DC made handguns illegal.

Good question, but it appears not. One thing that the anti-gun folks liked about this decision is that it effectively removes the "slippery slope" argument, where someone says, "By banning private ownership of machine guns, rocket launchers, and tactical nukes, we are on a slippery slope to banning all firearms!"

Here's an excerpt from the decision:

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

[tonup]

H&K's for everyone.

[ChrisNoF4i]

CT

[Brit-Triple]

Originally Posted by tonup

H&K's for everyone.

+1, amen