VICTORY IN DC! High court strikes down gun ban RULED

[White Israelite]

High court strikes down gun ban

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/26/scotus.guns/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Washington D.C.'s sweeping ban on handguns is unconstitutional.


A gun ownership supporter holds a placard in March outside the Supreme Court in Washington.

 The justices voted 5-4 against the ban with Justice Antonin Scalia writing the opinion for the majority.

At issue in District of Columbia v. Heller was whether the city's ban violated the Second Amendment right to "keep and bear arms" by preventing individuals -- as opposed to state militias -- from having guns in their homes.

District of Columbia officials argued they had the responsibility to impose "reasonable" weapons restrictions to reduce violent crime, but several Washingtonians challenged the 32-year-old law. Some said they had been constant victims of crimes and needed guns for protection.

In March, two women went before the justices with starkly different opinions on the handgun ban.

Shelly Parker told the court she is a single woman who has been threatened by drug dealers in her Washington neighborhood.

Don't Miss
Child rapists can't be executed, court rules
Court rules in favor of Muslim at Gitmo
High court to decide whether Navy saving whales
Gun laws in high court's sights
"In the event that someone does get in my home, I would have no defense, except maybe throw my paper towels at them," she said, explaining she told police she had an alarm, bars on her windows and a dog.

"What more am I supposed to do?" Parker recalled asking authorities. "The police turned to me and said, 'Get a gun.' "  See how proponents, opponents argued »

Elilta "Lily" Habtu, however, told the high court that she supports the handgun ban, and tighter gun control in general. Habtu was in a Virginia Tech classroom in April 2007 when fellow student Seung-Hui Cho burst in and began shooting. She survived bullets to the head and arm.

"There has to be tighter gun control; we can't let another Virginia Tech to happen," she told the court. "And we're just not doing it; we're sitting around; we're doing nothing. We let the opportunity arise for more massacres."

In March 2007, a federal appeals court overturned the ban, which keeps most private citizens from owning handguns and keeping them in their homes.

It was the first time a federal appeals court ruled a gun law unconstitutional on Second Amendment grounds.

City attorneys urged the high court to intervene, warning, "The District of Columbia -- a densely populated urban locality where the violence caused by handguns is well-documented -- will be unable to enforce a law that its elected officials have sensibly concluded saves lives."

There were 143 gun-related murders in Washington last year, compared with 135 in 1976, when the handgun ban was enacted.

The Second Amendment says, "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The wording repeatedly has raised the question of whether gun ownership is an individual right, or a collective one pertaining to state militias and therefore subject to regulation.

The Supreme Court has avoided the question since the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. The high court last examined the issue in 1939 but stayed away from the broad constitutional question.

Only Chicago, Illinois, has a handgun ban as sweeping as Washington's, though Maryland, Massachusetts and San Francisco, California, joined the Windy City in issuing briefs supporting the district's ban.

The National Rifle Association, Disabled Veterans for Self-Defense and the transgender group Pink Pistols -- along with 31 states -- filed briefs supporting the District of Columbia's gun owners.

In February, a majority of U.S. congressmen -- 55 senators and 250 representatives -- filed a brief urging the Supreme Court to strike down Washington's ordinance.


"Our founders didn't intend for the laws to be applied to some folks and not to others," Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, said at the time.

Washington's ban applies only to handguns. The city allows possession of rifles and shotguns, although it requires that they be kept in the home, unloaded and fitted with locks or dissembled.

[AsheDina]

Pilman-Cohen- NOW is the TIME for people to start taking your videos SERIOUS on Guns, FOR HEAVENS SAKE!!!!!!!!

[White Israelite]

BAD NEWS!

SCOTUS has recognized a right to "common" arms - those which people commonly have for non-military purposes.
SCOTUS has specifically not recognized a right to "militia" arms - those which allegedly have little place in normal society.

This utterly fails to recognize two plain points:
- the 2nd Amendment SPECIFICALLY recognized the need of the populace to be armed for MILITARY PURPOSES, which presumably includes whatever tools are most suitable thereto
- tools cannot become "common" if they are nationally prohibited prior to becoming common. To wit: many/most here would have M16s if only they were allowed to.

SCOTUS really doesn't want the machinegun ban to fall.


“Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.�

Well I take that back, how the heck is this a victory?

Scalia on the definition of arms:

"The term was applied then as now to weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity."


What? Wasn't there basically two arms (besides cannons); muskets and pistols?

And they were both used for military/self-defense and hunting purposes?

[דוד בן זאב אריה]

The Left is crazy!!!

[White Israelite]

The Left is crazy!!!

? huh?

[DownwithIslam]

Meir, I wish I could own a weapon. It's not realistic in NYC. I don't think their is even one weapon shop here.

[iratollah]

ADL issued a statement that they oppose this decision from the Supremes.  Of course, ADL specializes in hand-wringing and issuing statements of condemnation.  IIRC, it was Federation who filed an amicus curiae brief in the DC v Heller case, I'm not very pleased with them either.

Following is what I wrote to the ADL, using 999 of the 1000 characters they allow:

ADL's position on DC v Heller is disgraceful. Why did gun bans in DC fail to reduce DC gun crime?  It seems ADL would have been in favor of disarming Mordecai Anielewicz in the Warsaw Ghetto.  If we disarm Jews in the U.S., does ADL think that this will also prevent extremist hate groups from owning guns?  If 75 years ago in Europe there were 50,000 Jewish mothers with rifles, today there would be 30 million Jews in the world instead of 12 million.  Increasingly, the ADL appears to be more devoted to hand-wringing than action.  It was Jews who disarmed Jews in Germany.  If Jews are so secure in the U.S. that we don't need guns, then we don't need the ADL either.  Please remove my name from your fund-raising solicitation lists as I find your organization increasingly impotent in protecting the Jews in America from antisemitism.  We remain our own worst enemy.  When seconds count, the police will be there in minutes.  And ADL will be urging us to line up peacefully at the Umschlagplatz.

[White Israelite]

ADL issued a statement that they oppose this decision from the Supremes.  Of course, ADL specializes in hand-wringing and issuing statements of condemnation.  IIRC, it was Federation who filed an amicus curiae brief in the DC v Heller case, I'm not very pleased with them either.

Following is what I wrote to the ADL, using 999 of the 1000 characters they allow:

ADL's position on DC v Heller is disgraceful. Why did gun bans in DC fail to reduce DC gun crime?  It seems ADL would have been in favor of disarming Mordecai Anielewicz in the Warsaw Ghetto.  If we disarm Jews in the U.S., does ADL think that this will also prevent extremist hate groups from owning guns?  If 75 years ago in Europe there were 50,000 Jewish mothers with rifles, today there would be 30 million Jews in the world instead of 12 million.  Increasingly, the ADL appears to be more devoted to hand-wringing than action.  It was Jews who disarmed Jews in Germany.  If Jews are so secure in the U.S. that we don't need guns, then we don't need the ADL either.  Please remove my name from your fund-raising solicitation lists as I find your organization increasingly impotent in protecting the Jews in America from antisemitism.  We remain our own worst enemy.  When seconds count, the police will be there in minutes.  And ADL will be urging us to line up peacefully at the Umschlagplatz.

ADL is more anti-Jewish than some of the neo nazi groups imo.

[White Israelite]

DC Plans To Implement System For Registering Guns, Draft New Legislation
From a purely practical point of view, how exactly would one lawfully procure a firearm in DC? Do you have to go to the dealer, pay for it, obtain the make, model, S/N, etc., take that info to some office, fill out your registration paperwork, wait for the registration to be approved, then go pick up your gun?

Supreme Court Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court's 5-4 ruling strikes down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment.

"Unfortunately and disappointingly, the Supreme Court opted not to uphold the three-decade-old handgun ban in the District of Columbia," D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty said during a news conference following the ruling.

"It is important to both respect the court's authority and then to act quickly," Fenty said.

Fenty said the Metropolitan Police Department has 21 days to develop a system for citizens to register lawful handguns in their homes. Interim Attorney General Peter Nickles said that rules on who can apply for gun licenses will not change. Applicants will be required to be mentally competent adults, and they'll be fingerprinted.

In the meantime, D.C.'s gun ban will remain in effect. Automatic and semi-automatic guns remain illegal, Fenty said. Citizens still can't carry guns outside the home in D.C.

The police department will have an amnesty period in which residents who own handguns that were not previously registered can register without fear of criminal liability.

Police Chief Cathy Lanier stressed that citizens are still encouraged to store firearms safely in their homes, even though the court's ruling struck down D.C.'s requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks. Every person who registers a gun in D.C. is given a trigger lock, she said.

Lanier said citizens with questions can call 202-727-4275. A toll-free hot line will be set up to answer questions.

D.C. Council Judiciary Committee Chairman Phil Mendelson has scheduled a hearing for next Wednesday on a new law that will place restrictions on handguns without banning them outright.

It will take several weeks for the court's opinion to become law, News4's Tom Sherwood reported. D.C.'s gun ban is still on the books today.

Court Strikes Down Prohibition On Guns In Home, Trigger Lock Requirement

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia. The court's decision goes further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.

Scalia noted that the handgun is Americans' preferred weapon of self-defense in part because "it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police."

In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."

He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."

Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

Scalia said nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."

In a concluding paragraph to the his 64-page opinion, Scalia said the justices in the majority "are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and believe the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns."

Guns Rights Supporters, Lawmakers React To Ruling

Gun rights supporters hailed the decision. "I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.

The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the court's ruling will help put an end to ideological debates that have hindered city officials working to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

"Today's decision by the Supreme Court upholding those rights will benefit our coalition by finally putting to rest the ideological debates that have for too long obscured an obvious fact: criminals, who have no right to purchase or possess guns, nevertheless have easy access to them," the mayor said in a statement.

"Mayors and police chiefs have a responsibility to crack down on illegal guns and punish gun criminals, and it is encouraging that the Supreme Court recognizes the constitutionality of reasonable regulations that allow for us to carry out those responsibilities," Bloomberg said.

"I think this is a long overdue decision; I don't think the precedent has been seriously reaffirmed in decades," said. Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis.

"The right to bear arms is a fundamental right we enjoy as citizens of the United States," said Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn. "From individuals being able to protect their family and their home to sportsmen venturing into the outdoors, this is an important and historic day for all citizens of this great country."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, criticized the ruling. "I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it," she said.

"Today, President Bush's radical Supreme Court justices put rigid ideology ahead of the safety of communities in New Jersey and across the country," said Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. "This decision illustrates why I have strongly opposed extremist judicial nominees and will continue to do so in the future."

The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.

White House reaction was restrained. "We're pleased that the Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right of Americans to keep and bear arms," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.

Armed Security Guard's Suit Overturns One Of Nation's Strictest Gun Laws

The capital's gun law was among the nation's strictest.

Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller's favor and struck down Washington's handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.

Heller's attorneys released a statement after the Supreme Court's decision was issued Thursday.

"Besides being blatantly unconstitutional, the District's gun ban has been totally ineffective," co-counsel Robert Levy said in a statement. "Today's ruling sends a clear message that the District may not attempt to solve its crime problems by violating the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep functional firearms, including handguns, in their homes for lawful self defense."

"The Second Amendment says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. After thirty years of ignoring that right, the District will finally have to respect it," Heller said.

The law adopted by Washington's city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.

Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.

Forty-four state constitutions contain some form of gun rights, which are not affected by the court's consideration of Washington's restrictions.

The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.

What is it about liberals that they fear guns so much?

[iratollah]

ADL is more anti-Jewish than some of the neo nazi groups imo.

Can you explain your comment?  I'm very unimpressed with ADL, less so each day, but I don't understand your statement.

[White Israelite]

ADL is more anti-Jewish than some of the neo nazi groups imo.

Can you explain your comment?  I'm very unimpressed with ADL, less so each day, but I don't understand your statement.

The worst enemy of a people are self haters and traitors, ADL are traitors to the Jews, they label Kahanist and JDL as terrorist groups and work to disarm the people of this country. They claim to represent the Jewish voice but they do nothing but promote their own agenda which is why they are anti-Jewish because they hurt the image of Jews as a whole as people "think" the majority of Jews support the ADL.

[White Israelite]

New D.C. Gun Restrictions Unveiled

POSTED: 10:00 am EDT July 14, 2008
UPDATED: 12:31 pm EDT July 14, 2008

WASHINGTON -- D.C. officials unveiled new legislation Monday imposing strict controls on handguns and rules for registering firearms in the District.

The new regulations come after the Supreme Court struck down the city's 32-year-old ban on handguns last month, ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller that Americans can keep guns at home for self-defense.

Handguns will still be banned, except for self-defense in the home, city officials said at a noon news conference. Sawed-off shotguns, machine guns and short-barreled rifles are still prohibited.

Police will register one handgun per person for the first 90 days after the legislation becomes law, city officials said. A six-month amnesty period will be set up during which residents can register guns already in their possession.

Police will require ballistic testing on handguns before they are registered to see if the weapon was stolen or used in a crime, officials said.

The new legislation also modifies existing law to clarify that firearms must be stored unloaded and either disassembled or secured with a trigger lock, gun safe or similar device, officials said.The legislation includes an exception if a person reasonably perceives a threat of immediate harm to a person within a registered gun owner's home.

The D.C. Council is expected act on the emergency legislation called "Firearms Control Emergency Act of 2008" during the July 15 legislative session.

Police Chief Cathy Lanier also announced new rules for registering firearms and licensing firearms dealers.

D.C. residents who want to register handguns must complete an application from MPD's firearms registration section, pass a written firearms test and provide photos, proof of residency and proof of good vision. They will also be fingerprinted.

Residents can take approved applications to licensed firearms dealers within the District to pick up their weapon. Weapons purchased from dealers outside the District must be taken to dealers in the city to complete the transaction. Ballistics tests will be performed before the weapons can be taken home, police said.

Police will allow residents to register handguns they already own for the next six months. The Office of the Attorney General will not prosecute residents for unregistered possession during this amnesty period, but people who have committed crimes with firearms will remain subject to prosecution, police said. People who bring a firearm from another jurisdiction into D.C. must take it to the Firearms Registration Section or notify the section they will do so within 48 hours.

Police also clarified rules for becoming a licensed firearms dealer. Dealers must be licensed by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, among other provisions. 

http://www.nbc4.com/news/16876021/detail.html



These folks never learn.

[HuntingMuslims]

If guns are outlawed ......only outlaws will have guns

[Xoce]

The following is an article written this summer about the attorney who again has been victorious in the Supreme Court, Alan Gura (a conservative Jew from Israel, graduate of Georgetown Law) and his puzzlement of Jews' preference for heavy government intervention over private gun ownership.

http://www.washingtonjewishweek.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=9067&SectionID=4&SubSectionID=4&S=1

Sticking to his guns Local attorney argues landmark court case
by Richard Greenberg

Associate Editor

Depending on which Jew is asked, last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision establishing an individual's right to bear arms will either make America safer or increase business for undertakers.

Attorney Alan Gura firmly believes the former -- and he apparently argued his position persuasively enough to pave the way for a landmark high court ruling. Gura was the lead attorney for the winning side in the case of the District of Columbia vs. Heller.

Gura, who is also a regular Capital Schmoozing columnist for WJW, called the ruling "fantastic," maintaining in an interview this week that the right to bear arms is "one of the most important" freedoms that Americans enjoy because it is often a life-or-death issue.

A number of major Jewish organizations, however, have condemned the decision, which they believe will simply make America a more violent place. They include the American Jewish Committee, the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, the American Jewish Congress and the National Council of Jewish Women.

The RAC, for example, said it was "disappointed" by the ruling, which it said in a press release could lead to the "unchecked proliferation of firearms and a society in which each citizen is potentially armed to the teeth." The American "culture of violence stemming from our too-lax gun control laws will only be fed by today's ruling," the release continued.

Gura, in contrast, said statistics indicate that gun ownership tends to reduce crime and increase public safety. Moreover, self-protection is a fundamental right, he added, because citizens cannot always depend on the government to protect them from criminals or tyrannical rulers. He said Jews, in particular, should take note.

"We should examine our history and see that our reliance on governmental officials to preserve our liberties has not always worked out so well," explained Gura, who considers himself a libertarian. "There is still anti-Semitism. The sad fact is that many Jews have the option of being armed or dead and not that many prefer to be armed."

Asked why Jews seem disproportionately opposed to gun ownership, Gura said, "It's puzzling. Many Jews seem to prefer heavy government intervention, and it's not a good thing." Jews, he said, often have the mistaken belief "that the government is a beneficent force to always do good and help people out."

An Israeli native now living in Alexandria, where he attends the Conservative Agudas Achim Congregation, Gura, 37, came to the United States with his family when he was 7. They settled in Los Angeles. He received his undergraduate degree in government from Cornell University and his law degree from Georgetown University. Gura, whose law practice, Gura and Possessky, has offices Alexandria and D.C., focuses mainly on civil rights and intellectual property matters.

Gura, who with his wife has a 1-year-old son, first became a gun owner in the early 1990s because, he said, he wanted to be able to defend himself against crime. Among the contributing factors in his decision to buy a weapon were the 1992 riots in Los Angeles, which Gura said he watched on TV "with a great deal of concern" while he was in college at Cornell. He said he has never used the gun in self-defense.

Gura was hired to handle the case in 2003 by social acquaintance Robert Levy, a nonpracticing attorney and libertarian scholar. Levy and another lawyer recruited the plaintiffs, six D.C. residents who wanted to own handguns.

The Heller case was the first time Gura had argued a case before the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, he said he was not nervous. "It was a totally unique experience," he added. "It was very exciting, a great feeling. The justices are very congenial and they're dedicated to achieving the right results."

A number of Jewish organizations are sorry to see Gura's view prevail with the court.

The AJCongress termed the Heller ruling "bad law and even worse public policy," adding: "The ultimate outcome of today's decision is that it increases the likelihood that many Americans will die needlessly of gun violence."

According to NCJW, the ruling is a reminder of "the importance of the Supreme Court and the ability of five of its members to remake our laws using the prism of a right-wing agenda" that President George W. Bush has helped push through his appointments to the high court. As a result, NCJW "will continue our grassroots campaign to promote a judiciary that will protect the fundamental rights of all."

The AJCommittee also expressed "disappointment" over the decision, adding: "Gun control protects liberty, rather than restricts it."

Aaron Zelman, like Gura, disagrees entirely. He is the founder and director of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, a 19-year-old Wisconsin-based organization that Zelman said has about 5,000 dues-paying members worldwide, most of them in the United States.

Zelman, 62, said the ruling benefits law-abiding citizens because "criminals don't like people defending themselves." As for Jews, "we have a G-d-given right to defend our lives," he added. "What right does the state have to overturn G-d's law?

Still, he said the ruling may be nothing more than a "rhetorical victory" if the ideological composition of the Supreme Court changes under the next president. "Heller," he added, "is not set in stone."

[FreedomFighter08]

Meir, I wish I could own a weapon. It's not realistic in NYC. I don't think their is even one weapon shop here.

Same.

[omar_90]

If guns are outlawed ......only outlaws will have guns

löl true

[arksis]

I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

[Debbie Shafer]

Everyone sign up for NRA alerts.  http://www.ilaalerts.org   

Keep abreast of whats going on, call your representatives to fight for your rights and the 2nd amendment.  Our weapons may be the only protection we have in time.