McDonald is incorperated... A VICTORY FOR CIVIL RIGHTS!!!

[virginia mountainman]

In other news, Mayor Daley's head exploded.. Paul Helmke crapped his pants, he was reported saying the word "$Hit" than if on cue, he promptly "DID IT", so first he said it, than he did it.

And now even the VPC is mulling a press release saying that "significant gun control is doomed"


LOL!!!

DETAILS>..

10:04 Erin: Alito announces McDonald v. Chicago: reversed and remanded
Monday June 28, 2010 10:04 Erin
10:04 Tom: Gun rights prevail
Monday June 28, 2010 10:04 Tom
10:05 Erin: The opinion concludes that the 14th Amendment does incorporate the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller to keep and bear arms in self defense

Monday June 28, 2010 10:05 Erin
10:05 Tom: 5-4
Monday June 28, 2010 10:05 Tom
10:05 Erin: Stevens dissents for himself. Breyer dissents, joined by Ginsburg and Sotomayor.
Monday June 28, 2010 10:05 Erin
10:05 Tom: The majority seems divided, presumably on the precise standard
Monday June 28, 2010 10:05 Tom
10:06 Erin: The majority Justices do not support all parts of the Alito opinion, but all five agree that the 2d Amendment applies to state and local government.

[X_Digger]

1. Waiting on the text - here

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

[bossy22]

2. 5-4....wow

then again i need to read the text, im still inthe belief that this 5-4 was more from a standard of review issue rather than incorporation....i cant see the 4 dissenters disagreeing with all forms of incorporation

[virginia mountainman]

3. ALL 5 AGREE..

The majority Justices do not support all parts of the Alito opinion, but all five agree that the 2d Amendment applies to state and local government.

[virginia mountainman]

4. FULL TEXT HERE....

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

[jody]

5. Someone post in latest breaking news n/t

[brendan120678]

6. Yes! K&R.

Also from SCOTUS Blog:

"It should be noted that, in the guns case, the Court says explicitly in Alito's opinion that it would not reconsider the Slaughterhouse cases, which almost completely deprive the Privileges or Immunities Clause of any constitutional meaning."

[Statistical]

8. That makes me sad. Mixed bag.

Good the ruling uses 14th to incorporate the 2nd (which should have been done 100 years ago) and strengthens Heller decision but bad the P&I which is part of the rights of every American is essentially for all legal purposes dead & buried.

[Dappleganger]

7. Great news for people in Chicago

who wish to protect themselves. I hope that someone challenges that dumbass Bloomberg's laws in NYC as well.

[bossy22]

9. the dissent seems to have tried to re-argue heller

going through it i find the dissent in chicago (unlike Heller) to be extremely weak

[virginia mountainman]

12. Gun Control advocates, like to do the same things, over and over...

Even if they fail, they will do it, again and again..

Why should their court arguments be any different??

Now, you watch, The Brady Campaign will be out soon, with a press release, stating this is a VICTORY because the court "left the door open" for further regulation...

Fact remains, gun bans, are now clearly "off the table" as an option

[Bold Lib]

13. One descent argues that guns are a property issue and not a 2A issue?! n/t

[rusty_rebar]

29. I sort of agree with this...

Guns are property. So this is clearly a situation of the government saying what property I can and cannot own, and how I can use that property.

When you come down to it, all rights are implementations of property rights.

[X_Digger]

17. *smack* LOL..

Municipal respondents’ main argument is nothing less than a plea to disregard 50 years of incorporation precedent and return (presumably for this case only) to a bygone era.

(from the majority opinion)

[Bold Lib]

10. Has anyone found a level of scrutiny yet? I cannot and frankly

am NOT happy with what I am reading. It looks to me like it is gutting the strongest parts of Heller, which was not that strong to begin with.

EDIT. Scratch that, I was reading a descenting opinion - my bad!

[rusty_rebar]

30. Well they did not come out and say it but...

If you look at what Strict Scrutiny means: "Strict scrutiny arises in two basic contexts: when a "fundamental" constitutional right is infringed, particularly those listed in the Bill of Rights and those the court has deemed a fundamental right protected by the "liberty" or "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment; "


The important term here is fundamental. Strict scrutiny comes into play when we are talking about fundamental rights, especially those protected by the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.

So, to me it seems that this would end up falling under Strict Scrutiny.

[Bold Lib]

31. Damned if your not right about that. Looked into it a bit and Strict Scrutiny does apply.

Strict scrutiny arises in two basic contexts: when a "fundamental" constitutional right is infringed, particularly those listed in the Bill of Rights and those the court has deemed a fundamental right protected by the "liberty" or "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny

[X_Digger]

33. I wouldn't rely on wiki for that..

I hope it's true, but I haven't seen anyone else asserting that.

[Bold Lib]

34. I think they got it right. Here are some more links about it.

http://www.yourdictionary.com/law/strict-scrutiny

http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/strict-scrutiny/

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/s118.htm

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Strict+Scrutiny

The common verbiage in these definitions on how Strict Scrutiny is "fundamental right". SCOTUS did find in todays decision that the 2A is a fundamental right. I think this decision is going to be much bigger than it looks to be.

[Glassunion]

11. Drive by +1 (nt)

[Lurks Often]

14. Cue the wailing and gnashing of teeth by

those opposed to law abiding citizens in Chicago, Washington DC and other towns, cities and states across the country getting some of their rights back.

[jazzhound]

15. Excellent news. + 1,000,000 NT

[Bold Lib]

16. WOW, it is really going into how gun laws were used to keep blacks down after the civil war!

[safeinOhio]

18. This is a victory for those

that support reasonable restrictions. It supports the right to self defense with a handgun with in the home and allows current restrictions, such as permits, training and public places off limits to fire arms.


IV
Municipal respondents’ remaining arguments are at war
with our central holding in Heller: that the Second
Amendment protects a personal right to keep and bear
arms for lawful purposes, most notably for self-defense
within the home.
39-40
Municipal respondents’ remaining arguments are at war
with our central holding in Heller: that the Second
Amendment protects a personal right to keep and bear
arms for lawful purposes, most notably for self-defense
within the home. of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and gov-
ernment buildings, or laws imposing conditions and quali-
fications on the commercial sale of arms.” Id., at ___–___
(slip op., at 54–55). We repeat those assurances here.
Despite municipal respondents’ doomsday proclamations,
incorporation does not imperil every law regulating
firearms.


This would not restrict back ground checks on purchase, private or with FFD, by any state. This would not restrict registration of handguns, if not discriminatory by states. It does guarantee the right of non criminals and those not judged incompetent to buy and possess hand guns. I'd call this a major victory for the majority of reasonable gun owners.

[virginia mountainman]

19. Correct..

But it takes most of what the Gun Control advocates really want, (gun bans) off the table. This alone will silence many of them. As they shake their heads and say "whats the point?!"

Remember most Gun Control advocates, tend to have "short attention spans" and are only around a year or two, and most gun rights supporters, are in it "to win it" and have been at it for years.

And notice it mentions "commercial sale of arms" it says nothing about private transfer. I wonder what the justices had in mind for that.

[chibajoe]

20. Slowly but surely, we're winning the war

but this is only the second salvo.

[safeinOhio]

21. Many here lump everyone

in favor of reasonable restriction as "gun control" advocates. Most Americans and most legal gun owners would fall under that heading. They do not "really want" gun bans. Great use of generalizing to make a non relevant point, a tactic often used by ideologues and other extremist.

"commercial sale" is already restricted to background checks and record of sales and the court has not knocked that down or any states power to require checks or knock down any state laws that require registration of hand gun ownership.

[TheWraith]

22. Everyone is in favor of reasonable restriction.

It's just that some people here see "reasonable restriction" as forcing people to jump through a dozen hoops to own any kind of firearm at all, and banning anything that looks remotely scary or manufactured within the last 50 years.

[safeinOhio]

23. Then there are those

that think it is reasonable to own a nuclear bomb and just because they committed a violent felony 20 years ago they should be able to go into a bar with a loaded hand gun or it is unreasonable to have a background check.
Reasonable is somewhere in the middle.

[TheWraith]

24. Find someone who actually thinks that you should be able to own a nuke.

Until you do, you're just perpetuating strawman arguments, because the actual reality is nowhere near what you claim.

[rusty_rebar]

37. I would not have a problem...

with someone owning a nuke.

I would have a problem with them incinerating 40k people with it, but having it... not a problem to me.

[TPaine7]

35. "Reasonable is somewhere in the middle."

Not always.

Some people, and I'm not saying you're one of them, think that the middle ground between opposing sides is always or almost always the right one. Personally, I don't take the middle ground between the flat-earthers, and the round-earthers, the abolitionists and the slavers, the gender equality supporters and the misogynists, the Nazis and the Jews, the voodoo practitioners and the medical scientists.

Sometimes the middle ground is the good ground; sometimes not.

[Recursion]

36. The only thing in the middle of the road is dead armadillos NT

[Recursion]

25. This is horrible news for the GOP

If this decision can effectively prevent Democratic legislatures from passing poorly-thought-out gun control bills, one of the GOP's major wedge issues is gone.

[spin]

26. Excellent point. (n/t)

[kudzu22]

27. Oh really?

Did abortion disappear as a democratic issue after Roe v. Wade? They will campaign for decades to keep the leftists from "repealing Heller".

[Recursion]

28. That's why Roe v. Wade was politically bad for *Democrats*

You're getting the sides mixed up there.

Roe v. Wade basically prevented Republican attempts to legislate away a civil right (they've still tried, but they've always ended up failing). This makes it harder to run against anti-choice Republicans, because people don't take their bluster about abortion seriously.

If this ends up basically making another Assault Weapons Ban impossible to even try to pass, it will make the "Democrats want to take your guns" meme have fewer teeth.

[jazzhound]

32. Absolutely! Kudos for pointing this out.

What I'm finding particularly amusing with all of the back-and-forth today is that those who are embittered by this decision are completely unaware that they've been handed a golden blessing in disguise! That fact that so many pro-"control" Dems are so poorly educated on this issue precludes them from realizing how extremely politically damaging ill-crafted "control" laws have been to the party -- and how these worse-than-useless laws have sabotaged the implementation of truly worthwhile progressive ideas.

Never underestimate the power -- for good and for bad -- of the human ego.

EDITED TO ADD: One of the memes the pro gun rights advocates in this forum have to deal with on an almost daily basis is the "obsession" with guns. Damn right we're obsessed! We're obsessed with........

1) Civil rights
2) The Constitution
3) The Bill of Rights
4) Stripping away obstacles to the implementation of worthy Democratic ideals -- including self-destructive gun "control" legislation.