Did the Heller case clear up the meaning of the Constitution’s 2nd Amendment? D.C v. Heller dealt with an individuals right to possess a firearm for private use, but the case did not address the city, local and state laws restricting ownership or purchase. Next up … McDonald v. Chicago. Read more
Arghhhhh! Eric Holder bothers me and should all 2nd amendment advocates. He seems to me to be a now reluctant defender of an individual’s right to own firearms … forced there only by the SCOTUS District of Columbia v. Heller decision. Even in this case his position was well documented … the 2nd Amendment, he believed, referred only to a state’s collective right to form a militia.
I am not comforted by his testimony today when question by Dr Tom Coburn. You have to listen closely (audio is stepped on by Shep Smith) but he clearly states that position as accepted fact until Heller. I am not ware it was accepted by anyone other than gun control advocates. Based on what I heard … he is a man who will push Heller to the limits.
If you would like the longer cleaner version you can find it here at C-Span … the key portion begins at 53:40
The only guns he will “reasonably restrict” will be those belonging the law abiding citizens. The criminals don’t care. He scares me and should all law abiding citizens. Or am I overreacting?
For more news on Holder and the 2nd Amendment … go to Instapundit here … and then follow every day.
Man does this just make me mad. The recent SCOTUS decision confirmed that the Second Amendment was an individual right, but the Washington D.C. government still refuses to get with the program. This morning Dick Heller went to city hall or where ever to apply for his permit and it was automatically rejected.
Heller’s pistol is a semi-automatic handgun that has a magazine that holds seven rounds. For those interested, I would guess that the weapon is a .40 or .45 caliber. They denied the application for no good reason at all, just to be a pain in the ass and illegally fight the SCOTUS decision.
He did not bring his weapon to the meeting since his lawyer figured there was a good chance he’d be arrested doing so. Read more
I’ve been reading a bit about the Heller decision and how things will change for the better in the District. At this point, residents who qualify should be able to purchase a pistol for home protection. Personally, I do not think that a pistol is the best choice for a home defense weapon, but it’s better than nothing.
What options do D.C. residents have now that that the city can not block them from participating in their God given right to protect themselves and their families? You would not be surprised to learn that there is no place in the District to purchase a firearm.
What a great business opportunity! If someone approached me looking for funding to build a recreational indoor range that offered a wide selection of firearms, accessories and training opportunities; I may just head to the bank and close out that savings account earning 2 percent. Read more
Normally, this site does not cover breaking news, but for the DC v Heller case, we’re making an editorial decision to post information as soon as it is released. We’ll provide the full PDF of the decision – and the dissenting opinion if there is one – here on the site.
SCOTUSblog has the Cover it Live feed going right now. Best bet might be to click here to catch it.
9:58 a.m. Three opinions set for today, and Heller will not be first. We should know the decision right away, but the particulars will take a few minutes.
10:05 a.m. Per SCOTUSblog, Heller will be last.
10:12 a.m. Heller affirmed. Vote was 5-4, Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm.
As we wait for the actual opinion in PDF format, one comment. I expected 6-3 or even 7-2, but 5-4 really bugs me.
Opinion is here – this is a link on the Conservative247.org site just in case other news sites are overwhelmed. It is 157 pages.
For those interested, I’m providing links directly to the written transcript and some audio files as well. Walter E. Dillinger speaks before the court for the petitioners , including the city of Washington D.C., at the very beginning of the argument. Within a minute or two, Chief Justice Roberts throws Dillinger off his game and he never seems to recover. Maybe Dillinger never had a game plan.
Quite honestly, this is the first Supreme Court transcript I can ever remember listening to or reading from. That said, it seemed like Dillinger came into the court knowing that he was fighting a loosing battle from the getgo. You could just tell that he wanted to say guns are just evil, and we should not have them. Read more