U.S. justices could decide constitutionality of gun ownership
WASHINGTON: Both sides in a closely watched legal battle over the District of Columbia's strict gun-control law are urging the Supreme Court to hear the case. If the justices agree - a step they may announce as early as Tuesday - the Roberts court is very likely to find itself back on the front lines of the culture wars with an intensity unmatched even by the cases on abortion and race that defined the court's last term.
The question is whether the Second Amendment to the Constitution protects an individual right to "keep and bear arms." If the answer is yes, as a federal appeals court held in March, the justices must decide what such an interpretation means for a statute that bars all possession of handguns and that requires any other guns in the home to be disassembled or secured by trigger locks.
The Supreme Court has never answered the Second Amendment question directly, and it has been...
Wayne M. wrote: Also, gangs have been shooting a lot of people lately in Vancouver, Canada, albeit people known to police as well as some other innocent people who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Handguns are too easily obtained by criminals.
It's REALLY frustrating to watch our freedoms diminish at roughly the same rate at which the overall quality of the American people goes down.
Less responsible/mature people invariably creates a moral vaccuum that GOVERNMENT is all too willing to fill, as Wayne's statements point out.
I recently hunted pheasants in South Dakota with a man and his three pre-teen sons--and I felt COMPLETELY safe with them because it was obvious that they had been well-mentored by their parents and NOT by "the GOVERNMENT", with all it's do's and don't, many of which are decided by many people who don't know the least thing about firearms (except what they see in movies like "Dirty Harry" or "The Terminator" or read in fear-inducing news stories).
"Arms", in the 2nd amendment, referrs to personal weapons (i.e. pistols, rifles and shotguns). Heavier weapons, like grenades, mines or other so-called "ordinance" are not in view here.
Wayne M. wrote: terry evans, You ask "Didn't Canada outlaw guns"?
I read my message after I sent it I didn't mean to unload on you, sorry.
I just see this as a part of the big security reason for the Gov't to take away Honest, Sane, God fearing peoples Guns, and most freedoms in this country in a time where the world is really messed up. Like in Va. one evil person, thats what he was Wayne, evil, shoots all those people, in broad daylight at a school, and at the same time the Gov't says the borders are safe, only we need to wiretap everyones phone, detain anyone they want, have a database of info so they know every move you make, and strip search a little old lady at the airport and let 3 men from Saudi walk on through. My point, I think its Biblical to defend your family in this sick, demented world.
No, Canada did not outlaw guns. The Canadian government brought in long-gun registry and control, which means all guns must be registered when they are purchased or transferred. Those who wish to own long guns, for hunting or target practice, must first take a one day course on firearm handling and safety and pass a simple exam to obtain a Possession and Acquisition Licence. This wallet-size certificate will then allow them to buy long guns and ammunition.
Handguns are more tightly regulated. They also require a safety course and stricter regulation. Hand guns may not normally be carried around on a person or in a vehicle.
Of course criminals do not care or register their illegal handguns. The easy availability of handguns in the U.S. has made it easier for criminals.
You ask "did crime go down? Did murder cases decrease?"
Sorry, I do not know the answer to that. I have heard that most handgun killings are committed by criminals and gang members who obtain handguns from the U.S. and illegally smuggle them into Canada. The government is presently trying to bring in tougher laws for those who commit crimes with guns and will make mandatory prison sentences for minimum lengths of time. This will be a good thing.
Wayne M. wrote: That would be an interesting Supreme court case. The "right to bear arms" could be carried to extremes if it meant people with mental illness could carry guns or if it meant anyone could own and carry a howitzer or a machine gun when they go out. How far does one carry this right? Hopefully the court will bring some sanity to this issue. People also have a right to live in safety without the fear of being shot by someone with a few loose screws as has often happened.
So lets make it illegal to own a gun, no, lets make it illegal to manufacture a gun. The schools kick little children out of school for even drawing a gun. And by all means lets not even enforce the laws we have now. Will any of the above keep the gangs or criminals from getting a gun. Why are there so many school children killed in the classroom, where guns are not allowed. The killer now a days is the victim, the news , they show how this person needed help, felt alone, or whatever, its the shooters fault. do something to them to deter others. put the blame where it goes, on the shooter, not the gun. And what about knives, other sharp objects, box cutters- outlaw
Didn't Canada outlaw guns, did crime go down? Did murder cases decrease?
That would be an interesting Supreme court case. The "right to bear arms" could be carried to extremes if it meant people with mental illness could carry guns or if it meant anyone could own and carry a howitzer or a machine gun when they go out. How far does one carry this right?
Hopefully the court will bring some sanity to this issue. People also have a right to live in safety without the fear of being shot by someone with a few loose screws as has often happened.
Also, gangs have been shooting a lot of people lately in Vancouver, Canada, albeit people known to police as well as some other innocent people who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Handguns are too easily obtained by criminals.