Gun Haters are happy with Heller

[calsdad]

Pulled the following comments off a site I read:


As I noted in To Hell with Heller, this case makes it clear that gun limitations and regulations are perfectly permissible (see also my posts The Great Gun Decision: Dissent and Heller and the States). And thus, two federal courts (at least) have already upheld regulations on gun rights based on Heller. And D.C. itself is set to "Replace a Handgun Ban With Prohibitive Regulations."

So is it any surprise that Dennis Henigan, of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, is not concerned with Heller, because "the lower courts are likely to interpret Heller as giving a constitutional green light to virtually every gun control law short of a handgun ban." Of course he is right, as is clear from Scalia's opinion, and the predictable court results noted above.

To Hell with Heller:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/021863.html

The Great Gun Decision: Dissent
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/021701.html

Heller and the States:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/021865.html

D.C. to replace ban with restrictive regulations:
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/127571.html

Brady Center is not concerned with Heller:
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/127592.html


Maybe those who are worried about Obama and his alleged confiscation schemes are onto something ? .........

 

[Jose]

Somehow I don't think things are going to go as well for them as they think.

 

[Erebus]

I think it's going to depend greatly on who the next President is and how many judges they get to appoint.

This fight is by no stretch of the imagination over.

 

[Fsorrent]

I think it's going to depend greatly on who the next President is and how many judges they get to appoint.

This fight is by no stretch of the imagination over.

Even the NRA has acknowledged this threat! The heller decision can be just as easily used as toilet paper, if Obama becomes president. Register to vote people!

 

[drumenigma]

Even the NRA has acknowledged this threat! The heller decision can be just as easily used as toilet paper, if Obama becomes president. Register to vote people!

Bush is already using the constitution as toilet paper. I'm sure whoever gets in next will likely take the roll from him and leave a few new skid-marks on it.

 

[pdm]

Bush is already using the constitution as toilet paper. I'm sure whoever gets in next will likely take the roll from him and leave a few new skid-marks on it.

If Bush seems bad to you now, it is only because he stands on the shoulders of giants in the field of disrespecting the Constitution.

 

[Fsorrent]

Bush is already using the constitution as toilet paper. I'm sure whoever gets in next will likely take the roll from him and leave a few new skid-marks on it.

It's funny because it's true!

 

[Mike-Mike]

Somehow I don't think things are going to go as well for them as they think.

I think this is good for MA but not for some others.

 

[Joe R.]

Seems to be the key word for these people on the anti side is " reasonable. " Justice Scalia did leave that opening in his dissertation. There will have to be another case somewhere that the definition of reasonable will have to be decided. Our definition of reasonable doesn't seem to fit well with the anti's!

Joe R>

 

[sksguns]

I think "gun control" is an infringement on my rights to keep and bear arms....

 

[maee]

Their interpretation is BS because "every gun control law short of a ban" amounts to a ban. What these people want is a ban, pure and simple. They can go about it in a direct way and just ban guns, as was done in DC, or they can do it like CA/NY/MA and just chip away at guns until there is effectively a ban. Courts will interpret either the sneaky or the direct approach as a violation of civil rights. Its no different than poll taxes and the like.

The bottom line is that if you and me still have a constitutional right to obtain a handgun, subject to only a reasonable amount of burden, then how is this not a win for us? They want to eliminate guns, and the SCOTUS made it clear that this would not happen.

 

[Patriot]

I think this is good for MA but not for some others.

This would be a great thing if this happens. Most of the country could give a damn less
about MA, CA, MD, DC, etc. Including the rest of the country in the minutia would tend
to create a fair amount of consternation and political involvement on those who just write
the socialist state governments and people off as a lost cause.

 

[Mr Weebles]

The Gun Haters have been trying to make it sound as if Heller has no effect on their proposed gun control laws.

Why are they doing this? Because they have no choice.

If they admit defeat (and it IS a defeat for them) they lose power, stature and funding.

 

[Skald]

The Gun Haters have been trying to make it sound as if Heller has no effect on their proposed gun control laws.

Why are they doing this? Because they have no choice.

If they admit defeat (and it IS a defeat for them) they lose power, stature and funding.

Baghdad Bob is a good example.

He is on TV proclaiming that the Americans are miles and miles away from Baghdad, that they are incurring serious casualties and the whole time a U.S M1A1 Abrams tank is parked in a soccer field in Baghdad.

 

[kevin9]

The Gun Haters have been trying to make it sound as if Heller has no effect on their proposed gun control laws.

Why are they doing this? Because they have no choice.

If they admit defeat (and it IS a defeat for them) they lose power, stature and funding.

It's called whistling past the graveyard.