District of Columbia v. Heller

[The Robfather 0]

You can read the transcript at this link:

Oral Argument

 

Surprised there's no discussion of thist.

 

Walter Dellinger really got pwned by the justices. He started off trying to convince the court that the 2A was a right provided to the states to form militia. Basically, Heller has no rights because he wasn’t a member of a state militia. Even Stevens, Ginsberg and that side of the court could not escape the plain meaning.

 

Clement was arguing for the Bush administration and trying to preserve the federal government's power to regulate weapons. There was a strange side agrument that 'bare arms' means hunting.

 

Gura was weak, got bogged down in this and that kind of reasonable restriction, what should and shouldn't be restricted. Scalia had to bale Gura out.

 

Roberts has the funniest, most blunt questions:

 

Why would they say "the right of the people"? In other words, why wouldn't they say "state militias have the right to keep arms"?

 

So if you have a law that prohibits the possession of books, it's all right if you allow the possession of newspapers?

 

What is -- what is reasonable about a total ban on possession?

 

---

I'm thinking the DC ban on handguns is going down in flames and the justices will affirm the 2A as an indiviual right to keep and bare arms.

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

Fantastic. I read two thirds of that, and liked what I saw.

[The Robfather 0]

http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2...7_290/argument/

 

You can read along while listening to it... as well as match faces with whomever is talking. Pretty cool.

[snuffbox 0]

If you take all the DC people's guns, Baltimore people will just march in and take over the town.

[The Robfather 0]

For those keeping score, Obama has already said he supports DC handgun ban.

 

link

 

At his news conference, he voiced support for the District of Columbia's ban on handguns, which is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court next month.

 

"The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can't initiate gun safety laws to deal with gang bangers and random shootings on the street isn't born out by our Constitution," Obama said.

 

 

[snuffbox 0]

Some very disengenuous quoting there. I definitly disagree with Obama on the part you did snip from the larger article, though.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

I want the handgun ban in D.C. to stick. The last thing this area needs is drunk Hill staffers in boat shoes having another irritating thing to talk about. "My gun is so awesome man. So awesome. John McCain man. Hey, do you party?"

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

Yeah, but my guns are awesome.

[EricMM 0]

What is so frustrating is that its absolutely no one in DC trying to get this thing repealed, at least not D.C. residents. Its fucking Texans who are so fucking AFFRONTED that the national capitol decided that it is not in the city's best interest to have concealable weapons legal in the district.

 

You want to defend your house? Pack a fucking shotgun. This decision was made FOR A REASON!!

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

Under that law, shotguns must be kept unloaded and locked in a safe. And fuck that reason, it's unconstitutional.

 

I don't like the precedent it would set, either, that's the reason us red state isolationsist gun fanatics are so pissed. What's to keep other local governments from passing similar legislation? Worse yet, some kind of sweeping national crap.

[EricMM 0]

Well appeal that shit.

 

But for Christ's sake, keep handguns off of D.C.'s streets, please. What in the fuck do you care? Stay in the Midwest, leave D.C. to the D.C. folk. The fucking Mayor is trying to keep this ban in place, what right do these people think they have?

 

 

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

Y'know, considering that the laws against MURDER don't keep gang bangers from MURDERING one another, do you really think that a handgun ban will keep the same people from getting handguns? Seriously.

[EricMM 0]

At least then cops can arrest someone who has a handgun.

 

Things are different here. Again, why do you care? Do you think that YOUR elected officials would put this kind of thing into effect where YOU live?

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

It's not outside the realm of possibility. Unlikely, since whoever poses it will probably get shot, but not impossible. Especially in say, Chicago, Cinnci, Indy, South Bend, Ft. Wayne...These aren't conservative epicenters. They're college communities with nasty parts of town and substantial gun crime. It wouldn't take much more than some asshole shooting a white girl to get legislation in place that would send me up the river for my legal, registered handgun should I get pulled over for a fucking tail light.

 

It's rare I argue "slippery slope," but this is one of those cases.

 

For the sake of the situation though, I'll pose that the ban works. Handgun crime drops DRAMATICALLY, and the same murderous gangs this is targeted towards begin carrying legal shotguns and rifles. What then? A shotgun ban?

 

How much gang violence is being perpetrated with a legally purchased handgun?

 

 

[Vampiro69 0]

I was at the Supreme Court hearing and got to listen to the case for about 5 minutes. The Dellinger basically got owned, and Scallia basically mocked him during the hearing telling him to answer yes to one of the questions.