California appeals gun decision..

by sammielee24 32 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  sammielee24

  The gun issue is constantly in motion..sammieswife.

  California Gun Decision Muddies 2nd Amendment Waters

  6:00 am April 24, 2009, by Bob Barr

  It’s been less than a year since the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark Heller decision affirming the principle that the 2nd Amendment does indeed protect an individual right to keep and bear arms, and that the right it thus protects is a fundamental right. The High Court last June clearly established: (1) that we — the people — possess an individual right to own firearms; (2) that this fundamental right pre-dated the Constitution (in other words, the 2nd Amendment does not grant us the right, it merely protects it); and (3) that a state government (or, in the facts of the case itself, the District of Columbia) cannot so restrict the right that it in essence nullifies it.

  Now, in an April 20th decision, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (in a case out of Alameda County, California) has already muddied the 2nd Amendment picture clarified by the Heller decision. The circuit court did this by holding that the county government may prohibit firearms anywhere on property owned by the county (including guns shows at facilities owned by the county).
• 

  nicolaou

  Here's hoping that sense will be seen!

  Nic' (of the 'stirring the pot' class)
• 

  greenhornet

  The city of Seattle is trying to do the same thing.
• 

  still-fading

  But don't worry, it was the wacky 9th Circuit..........it's bound to be over-turned.
• 

  leavingwt

  The big news, IMHO, is that the 9th Circuit Incorporated the 2nd Amendment as a part of the 14th Amendment. No doubt, the Supreme Court will eventually decide on the Incorporation, at some point. With the current makeup of the Supreme Court, they could agree with the 9th Circuit.

  As far as the County deciding whether or not firearms will be permitted on THEIR property, that aspect doesn't sound much different than the right of private property owners to decide the same thing.

  I enjoyed this language from the judges...

  We therefore conclude that the right to keep and bear arms is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.” Colonial revolutionaries, the Founders, and a host of commentators and lawmakers living during the first one hundred years of the Republic all insisted on the fundamental nature of the right. It has long been regarded as the “true palladium of liberty.” Colonists relied on it to assert and to win their independence, and the victorious Union sought to prevent a recalcitrant South from abridging it less than a century later. The crucial role this deeply rooted right has played in our birth and history compels us to recognize that it is indeed fundamental, that it is necessary to the Anglo-American conception of ordered liberty that we have inherited. (PDF)
• 

  beksbks

  Hey I have a right to tell you you can't have a gun on MY property, eh?

  Maybe Judge Bybee is worried about his own safety, now that his torture memos are out.
• 

  leavingwt

  Hey I have a right to tell you you can't have a gun on MY property, eh?

  Absolutely. You can post a notice, and this makes it illegal for even permit holders to have firearms on your property/business.

  You're the King of Your Castle, so to speak.
• 

  beksbks

  That's Queen bub!
• 

  still-fading

  Oh I love agreeing with Beks! Makes me all warm and fuzzy! You ABSULUTLY have the right to allow or not allow guns in your house or on your property. That being said, look at the ruling, it pertains to county property. Which is, last time I checked owned by the people. Throw it on a ballot and let the voter decide, county property is their land and they should have the option to exercise their rights. Then I would have no problem with it at all.
• 

  beksbks

  Uh oh, I was going to suggest that as the solution as well SF!

  What about say a courtroom though? You can't bring a weapon in there. Or on a plane. How do you feel about that? I was going to mention an OzFest too, but I suppose that venue may be private............possibly.