Supreme Court rules on 2nd

[erps]

5/4-individual right.

It scares the be-jeebers out of me that so many of these decisions are 5/4. What are they doing back there, flippin' a coin?

[chucklesR]

Originally Posted by erps

5/4-individual right.

It scares the be-jeebers out of me that so many of these decisions are 5/4. What are they doing back there, flippin' a coin?

Taking calls from lobbists more likely.

[sailaway21]

Souldn't have ever been that close. The real question is, what the heck were the four thinking?

I'll try to find the actual ruling and post it.

My simple minded view of the matter, especially vis-a-vis Washington, DC, is based upon a few simple facts. Given the other responsibilities of the police, they cannot protect you in a reasonable response time, and yet you're not allowed to own the weapon that best helps you protect yourself. Silly me, I was under the quaint notion that we'd settled that matter shortly after the unpleasantness with King George.

[wind_magic]

I have to admit, this ruling was a complete surprise to me, I hadn't even heard the case was going on. Even if I had heard it was going on I had given up on the courts ruling in favor of gun ownership a long time ago, I'm amazed by the whole thing really.

[camaraderie]

Three 5-4 decisions in the last couple of weeks and Anthony Kennedy was the deciding vote in each. Could be the most powerful guy in the country.

[denby]

My feeling is , the 4 against should not be trusted to protect the constitution.

[wind_magic]

This is funny, from the Wikipedia page about the ruling ...

Prior to the Supreme Court's decision in June of 2008, several politicians from the state of Montana, including the Montana Secretary of State, had signed a joint resolution [46] asserting that, if the Supreme Court ruled against an individual-rights interpretation of the second amendment, the compact between the United States and Montana would be violated, and that the state "reserves all usual rights and remedies under historic contract law" should that occur.

You have to love Montana ...

[sailaway21]

Here's the complete SC decision. http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Note that it also tosses out requirements to have trigger locks or the weapon disassembled within the home. I'd long thought that a trigger lock on your deer rifle might make sense but no sense on the .38 you'd use when confronting an intruder.

I did not find the dissents, focusing on the meaning of the word militia as well as the dissent saying that while you have a right, Congress can still regulate that right, to be compelling.

Before the cheering starts, it might be worth noting that licensing of firearms was affirmed and we've yet to see what the enlightened communities of Chicago, San Francisco, and Washington, DC do in terms of licensing. Here's to betting that they do not go quietly.

[Freesail99]

I'd long thought that a trigger lock on your deer rifle might make sense but no sense on the .38 you'd use when confronting an intruder.

When I was in my late teens deer hunting and I was walking in a corn field, without the safety on. I always walked with the shotgun pointed down. Anyway, I am walking in this corn field when I stepped on a deer laying on the ground. The deer jumped up scaring the $hit out of me and I pulled the trigger. The deer was about 2 feet from the barrel of the gun. I blew it apart and learned a lesson.

[sailaway21]

I was referring to trigger locks, not the safety. You know-those locks you put through the trigger guard and then keep the key on your key ring? So when you need to blow some miscreant's ass back out through the window he's crawling through you've got to go find your car keys so you can unlock and fire your pistol?

If you'd had a trigger lock on your shot-gun that deer would have died of old age.