Submit your comments on this article |
Home Front: Politix |
Government files amicus -- on DC's side of Gun Control Law |
2008-01-12 |
Quick read: Gov't says, yes, it's an individual right. BUT we join with DC in asking Court to reverse the DC Circuit, because it applied strict scrutiny to the DC law. It should only have applied an intermediate standard. That is, the legal position of the US is that DC Circuit was wrong, a complete ban on handguns is NOT per se unconstitutional, it all depends on how good a reason DC can prove for it. Some quotes:
As I read this, the (Bush) Dept of Justice is asking that the Court hold it to be an individual right, but not strike the DC gun law, instead sending it back down to the trial court to take evidence on everything from how much the District needs the law to whether people can defend themselves without pistols and just what the DC trigger lock law means. THEN maybe it can begin another four year trek to the Supremes. That is, the DoJ REJECTS the DC Circuit position that an absolute, flat, ban on handguns violates the Second Amendment, and contends that it might just be justified, it all depends on the evidence. There was a saying during my years in DC that the GOP operated on two principles: screw your friends and appease your enemies. Yup. |
Posted by:Anonymoose |
#5 'moose, of course sense the supremos have a problem applying the "reasonable man" theory. Again, they're enough laws on the books for charging people who criminally use guns vice those that use them in self-def. Whether it be a .380 backup piece or a .50 cal sasser. The supremos other problem is that they're divided along political lines - the U.S. Const be damned. Any 8th Grader could read the 2d Amd and tell you what it means - as the founding fathers intended. |
Posted by: Broadhead6 2008-01-12 20:39 |
#4 You'd be besieged with parade organizers wanting you to come to "Their" event. |
Posted by: Redneck Jim 2008-01-12 20:27 |
#3 I don't know, I think I'd like a nice towed model 155MM to park in the driveway. It would definitely reduce the number of crazies I have coming to try to sell me "magazines", candy, and other stuff I don't want or need. |
Posted by: Old Patriot 2008-01-12 19:51 |
#2 I suspect the government is in the predicament of the prospect of the SCOTUS creating a legal gap, in which lots of old laws can be repealed. For example, limits on machine guns, including medium and heavy guns, and even artillery and explosives. The trouble is that those restrictions were made on the basis of limiting the 2nd Amendment, instead of on other grounds, as they should have been. In other words, there is an absence of good law that makes reasonable restrictions on "arms", if not guns. Even the constitution says "arms", which makes it worse. SCOTUS may choose to interpret "arms" in the 2nd Amendment to *solely* mean guns, but even this can create problems, with dual purpose "arms" that are not guns. No matter what happens, there is the potential here for a lot a bad side effects. |
Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-01-12 12:17 |
#1 District of Communists. Every citizen has THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. Period, CASE CLOSED. The weasel words of litigation and splitting hairs on the part of the gun control panzies makes me want to puke. Repeal the DC gun ban now. Then, immediately enact the gun laws that Vermont has and watch the violent crime rate drop at least 10% in DC. |
Posted by: Broadhead6 2008-01-12 11:43 |