Fight the U.N. Gun Ban

I believe that it is most probable that there will be a 5 to 4 vote
in favor of personal freedom, with Kennedy being the deciding vote.

David

OmSigDAVID wrote:

I believe that it is most probable that there will be a 5 to 4 vote
in favor of personal freedom, with Kennedy being the deciding vote.

David

Oral arguments hinted they would vote 8 to 1 in favor of including personal self defense gun rights in the Second Amendment.

No Heller ruling today -- next rulings come Wednesday at 10AM eastern time

oralloy wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

I believe that it is most probable that there will be a 5 to 4 vote
in favor of personal freedom, with Kennedy being the deciding vote.

David

Oral arguments hinted they would vote 8 to 1 in favor of including personal self defense gun rights in the Second Amendment.

It is theoretically possible.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

oralloy wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

I believe that it is most probable that there will be a 5 to 4 vote
in favor of personal freedom, with Kennedy being the deciding vote.

David

Oral arguments hinted they would vote 8 to 1
in favor of including personal self defense gun rights in the Second Amendment.

It is theoretically possible.

If the USSC recognizes personal self defense gun rights in the Second Amendment,
then this goes BEYOND recognition of the right to anti-burglary guns,
and will extend to anti-robbery guns ANYWHERE.

Quote:

Rumor has it Scalia is the author of the majority opinion for Heller.

I have it on very good authority
that Justice Scalia drew the question before the Court.

Quote:

This is a good sign for our gun rights on a federal level, but Scalia has long been a big opponent of extending our gun rights to state and local governments. I hope he doesn't write the opinion in a manner that undercuts any attempt to get the Second Amendment incorporated in the Fourteenth Amendment.

The question of incorporation is not before the Court.
For that question to be presented, presumably a case arising
from the judgment of a state court is necessary,
unless the USSC chooses to approach the issue upon the basis
of the rights of CITIZENSHIP; i.e., every American citizen has the
constitutional right to KABA in self-defense unobstructed by any government.
The odds are that an additional case arising from a state will be necessary to disable
and end discriminatory licensure of the right to live.

In the meantime,
suppressionists in the state legislatures, and municipal legislatures
may choose to retreat, falling back to less offensive positions.


David

oralloy wrote:

This is a good sign for our gun rights on a federal level, but Scalia has long been a big opponent of extending our gun rights to state and local governments. I hope he doesn't write the opinion in a manner that undercuts any attempt to get the Second Amendment incorporated in the Fourteenth Amendment.

The question of incorporation is not before the Court.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

oralloy wrote:

This is a good sign for our gun rights on a federal level, but Scalia has long been a big opponent of extending our gun rights to state and local governments. I hope he doesn't write the opinion in a manner that undercuts any attempt to get the Second Amendment incorporated in the Fourteenth Amendment.

The question of incorporation is not before the Court.

Yet.

Chicago is next.

I just hope that Scalia doesn't write the ruling in a manner that undercuts incorporation when we sue Chicago.

If he addresses incorporation at all,
I believe that he will do so to incorporate and apply freedom of selfdefense
to limit the state governments.

Quote:

If he addresses incorporation at all,
I believe that he will do so to incorporate and apply freedom of selfdefense
to limit the state governments.

That would step outside the case. DC is not a state, nor is it a city in a state.

DC has the possibility to be a very limited ruling because of the status
of the city being controlled by the Federal government.

HOWEVER,
if the USSC finds that every citizen has the right to KABA
and that this is a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, then that will apply
to curtail the state governments.

Quote:

HOWEVER,
if the USSC finds that every citizen has the right to KABA
and that this is a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, then that will apply
to curtail the state governments.

The court has no reason to rule in such a broad manner since they can deal with the issue as a federally controlled area. Kennedy isn't about to sign unto a ruling that makes such a broad assessment. The ruling, no matter which way it goes will be restricted and not address "fundamental rights" of KABA.