what a joke ruling by the courts

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by DKSuddeth, Jan 15, 2004.

  1. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/15/gun.law.ap/index.html

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge on Wednesday upheld the District of Columbia's gun control law that prohibits ownership of handguns, rejecting a legal challenge by a group of citizens backed by the National Rifle Association.

    U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton dismissed the lawsuit in which the plaintiffs argued that the 28-year-old law violated their Second Amendment right to own guns. The D.C. law prohibits ownership or possession of handguns and requires that others, such as shotguns, be kept unloaded, disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.

    Walton ruled that the Second Amendment is not a broad-based right of gun ownership.

    "The Second Amendment does not confer an individual a right to possess firearms. Rather, the Amendment's objective is to ensure the vitality of state militias," Walton wrote.

    He went on to say that the amendment was designed to protect the citizens against a potentially oppressive federal government.

    He also ruled that the Second Amendment does not apply to the district because it was intended to protect state citizens, and the district is not a state.

    A gun control advocate welcomed the ruling.

    "It's a big victory for those who overwhelmingly believe that we need fewer guns on our streets, not more," said Matt Nosanchuk, a spokesman for the Violence Policy Center.

    Andrew Arulanandam, an NRA spokesman, said the group's lawyers had not seen the ruling on Wednesday night but noted that other courts have taken the opposite opinion.


    They can have my gun when they pry it from my cold dead fingers!!!
     
  2. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    With as much crime as there is in DC, I say give everyone guns! I'll bet the crime rate drops.
     
  3. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    isn't there a saying that goes "an armed society is a polite society"?
     
  4. Johnney
    Offline

    Johnney Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2003
    Messages:
    4,330
    Thanks Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    IOWA
    Ratings:
    +141
    Ive said it before and ill say it again, the only thing they are doing is making it harder for the average citizen to get a gun, be it a pistol/ revolver or a long gun. they arent making it to hard for a felon to get one. not one bit. so they "say "that they arent supposed to have one, big fucking deal. say all you want, but when are they going to actually act on it?
     
  5. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    This judge is a joke. But, now you know why the liberal establishment is so adamant about not allowing Bush's more conservative judicial nominations to be confirmed - the liberals who believe this tripe don't want to lose control of the courts, where they can get away with these kind of inane rulings.
     
  6. Moi
    Offline

    Moi Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    1,859
    Thanks Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    The ONLY GOOD place
    Ratings:
    +11
    Ugh...hope this guy retires soon.
     
  7. NewGuy
    Online

    NewGuy Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Now where does it say that?

    If that is what it said, there would not be a comma between "State" and "the". There would be a colon. Instead, these are multiple ideas being seperated by commas as appropriate.

    If the judge would learn English, he would be qualified.
     
  8. winston churchi
    Offline

    winston churchi Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2004
    Messages:
    640
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +9
    So listen up for all you would be or current murderers - no handguns in DC - got it?

    I wish people would realize that gun control does NOTHING to stop a person from obtaining a gun that wants one. If I wanted to rant about the streets of DC and shoot - I could. I do not need some law telling me I can't - if you are planning to use a gun for illegal reason than thats how you obtain it.

    Gun control is useless.
     
  9. NewGuy
    Online

    NewGuy Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    I always use the argument that if they ban guns, they will have to go after knives next......then forks......then spoons.

    As dumb as this sounds, the origins of martial arts with weapons follows the same course.

    The point being, we will kill ourselves with whatever we have.

    The founding fathers knew that and considered our personal welfare against government tyrrany was more important. -Mainly because individual morals and ethics, being spiritually based, kept things in line.

    They let us have "ARMS", not "guns". They used the term "gun" in common language as we do. They MEANT "arms" because we individually are entitled to the same technological defenses our government has in order to keep them in line as last ditch enforcement. -This is referenced by other documents stating that when we get into the same situation of government tyrrany again, we are to overthrow again, and start over.

    Get a judge to tell you that, and it will be a freakin' miracle.
     
  10. Zhukov
    Offline

    Zhukov VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2003
    Messages:
    3,492
    Thanks Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Everywhere, simultaneously.
    Ratings:
    +301
    Imagine if judges interpreted every other ammendment as narrowly as the liberal activist judges interpret the 2nd.

    On the other hand, were it that they interpreted it as broadly as all the others, it would be mandatory for everyone to have an assualt rifle.

    Just another example of the double standard.
     

Share This Page