High court strikes down Chicago handgun ban

[dzzz]

:PROFSheriffHL:

linky (http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/06/28/us.scotus.handgun.ban/index.html?eref=rss_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3 A+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo)

[Street Wolf]

Should have never been a ban to begin with.

[Wander]

I wonder how long it will be until the DC ban is challenged? This case has set the precedent needed to argue against that ban.

[TACODOC]

Nice :ylsmoke:

[dzzz]

I'm disappointed, but agree the ban was unconstitutional. I wonder what it means for all the people in jail on handgun possesion charges from chicago, new york and d.c.?

[modelbuilder]

I wonder how long it will be until the DC ban is challenged? This case has set the precedent needed to argue against that ban.

I thought the DC ban was already challenged a year ago.

[TACODOC]

This case has set the precedent needed to argue against that ban.


There should be a precedent to argue several bans in several cities and states since they are all bogus.

[Mr. Leary]

:wings:

[FLYFISHEXPERT]

I thought the DC ban was already challenged a year ago.

They did.


The court majority refused to limit its 2008 District of Columbia ruling. That decision offered at least partial constitutional validation to citizens seeking the right to possess one of the most common types of firearms in their homes. The Chicago ruling now extends that right significantly.

[mountainsoul]

I bet Daley's really pissed!

But maybe they won't need the National Guard patrolling the South Side with their tanks and assault rifles now...

...nah second thoughts. They still most likely will. :rolleyes:

[john101477]

:wings: :victory: :PROFSheriffHL: :friday:
What a huge win. The only problem i have is the fact that it was a very left vs right vote. In a judicial system there is no room for such blatant party lines.

[Viggen]

So, Im a firearms owner, more long guns than hand guns, but agree with the bans. I live outside of DC and have for a little over a decade. I can remember when you did not want to be anywhere outside the mall past 3 or 4 in the afternoon. The handgun ban took hold, the law was enforced and the violence and homicide rate dropped precipitously. It was fantastic. Since the repeal, the official ban no longer exists but DC has tailored their law to make it such a complete hassle to buy a handgun that many wont even bother.

Im not a strict constructionist nor do I completely agree with judicial activism but there has to be some leeway given for public safety but I know that this is impossible. The Constitution is a yes or no document. DC was terrible and the hand gun ban made a dent. Chicago IS the wild west. The homicide rate is second only to the likes of Detroit and Baltimore. Sometimes, public safety has to be looked at. I guarantee that Chicago will make it incredibly hard to buy a gun. As long as they dont say 'NO,' they can do whatever they want and I truly hope that they do. You should search through some of the news bureaus about Chicagos culture of violence. It really is shocking. The latest case of a flag being flown upside down (if you dont know what that means, google it) I can think of was in Chicago in front of a church, I believe.

On a related note, there are 900 laws that will be going into effect in Va this year and one of them is a change to the concealed law. You can now have your gun with you in certain public venues, including those that sell alcohol. Sweet decision :rolleyes:

[modelbuilder]

I'm all for this repeal but this made me laugh...

http://www.theonion.com/articles/8yearold-accidentally-exercises-second-amendment-r,725/

[SunTzuNephew]

I wonder how long it will be until the DC ban is challenged? This case has set the precedent needed to argue against that ban.


It was decided two years ago, in the Heller decision.

[BigAl]

I'm all for this repeal but this made me laugh...

http://www.theonion.com/articles/8yearold-accidentally-exercises-second-amendment-r,725/

Doctors worked for six hours to reconstruct Timothy Cummings' femur, which shattered from the impact of the high-velocity teflon-coated slugs, and to graft his remaining muscular and circulatory tissue over the fist-sized exit wound below his left buttock

these guys got their facts screwy, most would not consider a .38, 'high velocity':sombrero:

[BorregoWrangler]

So, Im a firearms owner, more long guns than hand guns, but agree with the bans. I live outside of DC and have for a little over a decade. I can remember when you did not want to be anywhere outside the mall past 3 or 4 in the afternoon. The handgun ban took hold, the law was enforced and the violence and homicide rate dropped precipitously. It was fantastic. Since the repeal, the official ban no longer exists but DC has tailored their law to make it such a complete hassle to buy a handgun that many wont even bother.

Im not a strict constructionist nor do I completely agree with judicial activism but there has to be some leeway given for public safety but I know that this is impossible. The Constitution is a yes or no document. DC was terrible and the hand gun ban made a dent. Chicago IS the wild west. The homicide rate is second only to the likes of Detroit and Baltimore. Sometimes, public safety has to be looked at. I guarantee that Chicago will make it incredibly hard to buy a gun. As long as they dont say 'NO,' they can do whatever they want and I truly hope that they do. You should search through some of the news bureaus about Chicagos culture of violence. It really is shocking. The latest case of a flag being flown upside down (if you dont know what that means, google it) I can think of was in Chicago in front of a church, I believe.

On a related note, there are 900 laws that will be going into effect in Va this year and one of them is a change to the concealed law. You can now have your gun with you in certain public venues, including those that sell alcohol. Sweet decision :rolleyes:

I too am a firearms owner. While I don't doubt that you believe this, I find it very difficult to believe what you've said concerning the relationship between the DC gun ban and violent crime. This comes from not only what I've researched but also from friends living in that area. Since the gun ban was enacted violent crime skyrocketed. I am not aware of any credible study which shows these law have worked -- by which I mean that they have reduced crimes by individuals using guns.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Guns are not the problem. On the contrary, lax criminal penalties and laws that disarm the law-abiding are responsible for giving criminals a safer working environment. Murder and rape are already against the law so why would those who commit such atrocities abide by a gun ban?

[TACODOC]

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Guns are not the problem. On the contrary, lax criminal penalties and laws that disarm the law-abiding are responsible for giving criminals a safer working environment. Murder and rape are already against the law so why would those who commit such atrocities abide by a gun ban?

Well said.

[haven]

"High court strikes down Chicago handgun ban"

Two points. First, nothing was struck down today. The high court instructed the lower court that the 2nd Amendment's prohibition against government interference with the right to bear arms applies to state and local governments, as well as the federal government.

This ruling is an expansion of the decision reached two years ago in the Heller vs District of Columbia. In the Heller case, the court ruled that the feds can't interfere with the right to bear arms as described in the 2nd Amendment. The new case includes state and local governments.

It's very likely that the lower court will now rule against Chicago's handgun ban. But the ban is still in effect. With lots of legal wrangling possible, the final outcome could take years.

Second, in both the Heller case and this one, the Supreme Court judges' vote was 5 to 4. A single change in vote could make the outcome very different. There are plenty of cases where the Supreme Court overturned precedents set by earlier courts.

[Wyowanderer]

So, Im a firearms owner, more long guns than hand guns, but agree with the bans. I live outside of DC and have for a little over a decade. I can remember when you did not want to be anywhere outside the mall past 3 or 4 in the afternoon. The handgun ban took hold, the law was enforced and the violence and homicide rate dropped precipitously. It was fantastic. Since the repeal, the official ban no longer exists but DC has tailored their law to make it such a complete hassle to buy a handgun that many wont even bother.

If you're referring to the ban of 1975, it had little effect, see below. There was certainly no precipitious drop in the murder rate.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm

The trouble with gun laws is that they only affect those who will obey the law in the first place- law abiding citizens. Criminals already ignore the law, and more firearm restrictions serve only to disarm those in need of self protection


Im not a strict constructionist nor do I completely agree with judicial activism but there has to be some leeway given for public safety but I know that this is impossible. The Constitution is a yes or no document. DC was terrible and the hand gun ban made a dent. Chicago IS the wild west. The homicide rate is second only to the likes of Detroit and Baltimore. Sometimes, public safety has to be looked at. I guarantee that Chicago will make it incredibly hard to buy a gun. As long as they dont say 'NO,' they can do whatever they want and I truly hope that they do. You should search through some of the news bureaus about Chicagos culture of violence. It really is shocking. The latest case of a flag being flown upside down (if you dont know what that means, google it) I can think of was in Chicago in front of a church, I believe.

On a related note, there are 900 laws that will be going into effect in Va this year and one of them is a change to the concealed law. You can now have your gun with you in certain public venues, including those that sell alcohol. Sweet decision :rolleyes:


If you make it easy for ordinary citizens to protect themselves AND take effort to eliminate poverty, there will be less crime.

[Wyowanderer]

these guys got their facts screwy, most would not consider a .38, 'high velocity'

In fact, it isn't a high velocity round. The highest velocity I can find in literature is 1,550 feet per second; hardly high velocity.
That said, even a 22 caliber handgun can kill, and should be treated with respect by everyone, since kids may or may not.

[BriansFJ]

The trouble with gun laws is that they only affect those who will obey the law in the first place- law abiding citizens. Criminals already ignore the law, and more firearm restrictions serve only to disarm those in need of self protection.

Yup.:iagree:

[modelbuilder]

In fact, it isn't a high velocity round. The highest velocity I can find in literature is 1,550 feet per second; hardly high velocity.
That said, even a 22 caliber handgun can kill, and should be treated with respect by everyone, since kids may or may not.

Holy crap...you guys know it's an onion article...it's fake and everything detail in it is fake.



.

[john101477]

The story in the Onion is just plain stupid. if anyone is to blame it is the parents here. At 8 years old I was very aware of the dangers associated with firearms. for the parents to have not taught this to the child is just another mark on parental neglect.

I personally am very happy about the ruling and look forward to many more such rulings.

[modelbuilder]

The story in the Onion is just plain stupid.

I think that was the point of them writing it.


.

[robert]

And once again for those who missed it- The Onion is a spoof newsite. It used to be a newspaper but they've pretty much gone all internet now. They have some really funny stuff too. One of my favorites:

http://www.theonion.com/video/study-multiple-stab-wounds-may-be-harmful-to-monke,14150/

[DaktariEd]

:xxrotflma ROFLMAO!!!! :xxrotflma

The Onion is, and always will be, total spoof!
I love it when people fall for it.
(I did the first time I saw it...just like SNL back in '79).

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_4gNhxQc1fZA/SvwSOe25k_I/AAAAAAAAADM/3PUQ6JOAmcU/s800/safari%20copy.gif

[BigAl]

Holy crap...you guys know it's an onion article...it's fake and everything detail in it is fake.



.

Ya i was trying to be funny too, hence the little party guy icon, pretty good huh?

[SunTzuNephew]

So, Im a firearms owner, more long guns than hand guns, but agree with the bans. I live outside of DC and have for a little over a decade. I can remember when you did not want to be anywhere outside the mall past 3 or 4 in the afternoon. The handgun ban took hold, the law was enforced and the violence and homicide rate dropped precipitously. It was fantastic. Since the repeal, the official ban no longer exists but DC has tailored their law to make it such a complete hassle to buy a handgun that many wont even bother.

Im not a strict constructionist nor do I completely agree with judicial activism but there has to be some leeway given for public safety but I know that this is impossible. The Constitution is a yes or no document. DC was terrible and the hand gun ban made a dent. Chicago IS the wild west. The homicide rate is second only to the likes of Detroit and Baltimore. Sometimes, public safety has to be looked at. I guarantee that Chicago will make it incredibly hard to buy a gun. As long as they dont say 'NO,' they can do whatever they want and I truly hope that they do. You should search through some of the news bureaus about Chicagos culture of violence. It really is shocking. The latest case of a flag being flown upside down (if you dont know what that means, google it) I can think of was in Chicago in front of a church, I believe.

On a related note, there are 900 laws that will be going into effect in Va this year and one of them is a change to the concealed law. You can now have your gun with you in certain public venues, including those that sell alcohol. Sweet decision :rolleyes:

The actual statistics concerning handgun violence in DC, and surrounding areas of Va and Md completely contradict your statements, ESPECIALLY since the DC ban.

And I've carried concealed in establishments selling alcohol for years without shooting anyone. Neither have most of the people I know around here.

And despite the most stringent handgun control laws in the US, Chicago continues to have very high rates of handgun violence. This past weekend 24 were shot, the weekend before 52 or 54 (not all fatalities). States with shall-issue CCW laws have amazingly low rates of handgun (or other firearm) violence.

[Wyowanderer]

Holy crap...you guys know it's an onion article...it's fake and everything detail in it is fake.



.

I know. I was just trying to give some idea what high velocity isn't.

[Klierslc]

I have a platoon of Marines stationed in Arlington, VA. I can see the national mall from my office. Last year, one of my Marines was busted for carrying a pistol on base in his car--his reasoning: "the parts of DC that I go to you have to have a weapon or you will get jacked" Subsequently, two other Marines that live in that area admitted to carrying weapons in their cars in DC. Southeast DC to be exact. This was occurring pre-Heller BTW.

Just so you know how effective the gun ban was.

For what it is worth, these particular Marines are not shining examples of our corps values. One has been discharged and two are pending courts martial for unrelated deficiencies.


As far as the new VA law--I frequent restaurants that serve alchohol very frequently. I never carry a gun if I am drinking. The new law does not change that.

[dieselcruiserhead]

I generally vote left but this ban was flat out unconstitutional and I agree with the courts. Also the only people without guns are the legally carrying ones regardless.

[TrailTrackers]

.
Also the only people without guns are the legally carrying ones regardless.

Say what? What you say here makes no sense to me at all. Please explain what you mean.

[YJake]

We went over this in a law class today. Basically, it just told the state and local governments that they have to follow Supreme Court case law (Heller) and stop being idiots. The decision affects them too, not just D.C.

Although, the ban is still in place and the mayor is going to do everything he can to regulate pistols despite the decision. Which sucks, but such is the way of things especially in politically oriented state such as Illinois

Anybody from Chi Town here?

-Jake

[case]

Chicago's mayor stated a week ago or more that he was already prepared to set up new regulations if the court ruled this way. It will work the same way as the D.C.-Heller situation, where the total ban is gone, but the restrictions and hoops that citizens of Chicago will have to go through will keep 99% from actually ever applying.

Chicago is considering requiring insurance on anyone who keeps a handgun in their home, as well as mandatory training. They have also said that they will pass rules to keep any FFL from operating inside the city.

It will take additional lawsuits before the people living in Chicago or D.C. are allowed to actually exercise their rights, like keeping their weapons loaded or GASP!!!!-carrying them outside their homes.


There is nothing that could persuade me to live in a place like that.

[YJake]

There is nothing that could persuade me to live in a place like that.

Well said. :ylsmoke:

-Jake

[4XLT]

Since the SCOTUS ruling, Daley wants, among numerous other restrictions, to limit Chicago residents to the purchase of one gun and not to allow that gun outside of the owner's personal residence - not even into their yard. That kind of leadership brilliance isn't going to provide the balance needed between gun rights and sensible gun laws.

This will take a LONG time to be sorted out in Chicago.

Meanwhile, 3 police officers have been killed in Chicago since May added to about 30 homicides so far this month.

[baca327]

Say what? What you say here makes no sense to me at all. Please explain what you mean.

I'm guessing he means the ones that abide by the laws are the ones that were unarmed until recently, but those that have no problem killing another human being over money or gang initiation etc.. could careless about the law and will obtain a firearm regardless of laws set in place.