|
REPLY 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
1/21/2008 8:31 PM
|
#1
|
wolfva
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 78
|
DC gunban
Well, if the 2nd Amendment does not apply to individuals, then it is the ONLY in the Bill of Rights that doesn't.
I think DC has proven that gun control does not work. No
matter how many laws and ordinancese they've passed, crime and murder
go up. And they stumble around scratching their heads and wonder
why. I dunno, maybe it's because CRIMINALS DON'T OBEY THE
LAW!!! But try telling THAT to a liberal. Or a DC
politician.
|
|
|
1/23/2008 11:09 PM
|
#2
|
Steve Rothstein
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 249
|
RE: DC v. Heller
I agree. I don't know how to get the average person to understand that the laws will only stop honest people. It is like the new bank policy where they are telling people not to wear hats or sunglasses into the bank. If that works, why would a sign saying "No Robberies Allowed" not work just as well? Because honest people will try to comply but the robbers don't obey the rules.
And the Second clearly applies to individuals to me. I have never understood how anyone could claim other wise. But, I am not a liberal trying to control others, so...
|
|
|
1/24/2008 5:43 PM
|
#3
|
tgis81
Join Date: October 2007
Posts: 1
|
RE: DC v. Heller
No matter if they rule that DC is viewed as a state or not, the people who live in DC are still United States citizens. I am a police officer in DC and, being from a Commonwealth state (with "shall issue" type laws for conceal permits), I just don't understand why so many people in DC are so afraid of an honest citizen having an operable firearm in their home for protection from the crime (ie. constant burglaries) that happen in DC. Now whether or not they want to allow conceal carry laws... that's another issue that I'm sure will be brought up sooner or later. As of right now, the only people I've "bumped into" that had guns in DC have been criminals/convicts, etc who were up to no good. Armed robberies happen often and when caught, the suspect's gun is never legal. That means the "strictest gun laws in the nation" have failed to stop gun violence. States (such as Virginia) that allow law abiding citizens to own and carry firearms have much lower crime rates altogether.
Many of the people who were born and raised in DC do not know any different, so of course they are probably terrified of allowing citizens to have an operable gun in their home. Where I come from, the criminals are terrified of the citizens with guns, in fact more so than they are of the police. This in turn has a positive affect on crime rates.
We'll see what happens with the case. I'm trying to follow.
|
|
|
3/19/2008 8:09 AM
|
#4
|
irishone
Join Date: March 2008
Posts: 511
|
RE: DC v. Heller
The crime rates are down in states that allow people to be in public with a weapon.....the ACLU and the neener-nanny leftwing kooknuts will try to disarm us...may be a weebit paranoid but, it would be much easier for a total take over of this country if we were not able to fight back. LOCK N LOAD!
|
|
|
3/19/2008 8:33 PM
|
#5
|
Steve Rothstein
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 249
|
RE: DC v. Heller
Well, we will know for sure in June (or around then), but for now, it sure looks like SCOTUS agrees with us. The Second is an individual right and we need it for both self defense and the defense of the state.
I think the vote will be no worse than 7-2 to affirm the appeals court ruling. The only question will be what standard of review and what is considered reasonable. My biggest fear is that SCOTUS will punt on this by declaring the Second and individual right that applies to DC, but then sending it back to the originating court for review on the issue of scrutiny. It just means we keep going longer and repeat the process over again.
|
|
|
3/20/2008 10:18 AM
|
#6
|
irishone
Join Date: March 2008
Posts: 511
|
RE: DC v. Heller
WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY AND RESOURCES!
|
|