PDA

View Full Version : I love seeing this!


acolytes
11-26-2012, 3:49 PM
Federal Court Upholds Right to Keep and Bear Arms and Awards the NRA $125,000 in Attorney’s Fees

http://blog.crpa.org/?p=3587

POLICESTATE
11-26-2012, 3:53 PM
Odds on Chicago appealing?

IVC
11-26-2012, 4:01 PM
Looks like they've already cut the check, so not sure they'll appeal.

On a separate note, any victory like this is *huge* at this time since it becomes just one more tool in the toolbox which can be used effectively in preventing politicians from attempting it in the future. Even those cases that are not precedent setting help a lot in this battle.

SlobRay
11-26-2012, 4:33 PM
Chicago loves to giveaway its tax dollars, and to help the fight for RKBA nationally....
$399,950 to the SAF
$125,000 to the NRA
Maybe we should send them a “Thank you” card or something.

Ray

Meplat
11-26-2012, 4:49 PM
Odds on Chicago appealing?

After a judicial beet down like that I doubt it. But all they have to do is rewrite the law so it will pass muster; be more specific about what exactly is a disabling misdemeanor. Passive stuff like simple possession will not be included, but something like unlawful discharge probably will. They will keep pushing the envelope to see how much infringement they can get away with. Shall issue in CA will be the same story. Get comfortable; this is going to take a while.

Ford8N
11-26-2012, 5:25 PM
After a judicial beet down like that I doubt it. But all they have to do is rewrite the law so it will pass muster; be more specific about what exactly is a disabling misdemeanor. Passive stuff like simple possession will not be included, but something like unlawful discharge probably will. They will keep pushing the envelope to see how much infringement they can get away with. Shall issue in CA will be the same story. Get comfortable; this is going to take a while.

Why wait? Not worth it, California sux!

Meplat
11-26-2012, 7:12 PM
Why wait? Not worth it, California sux!

Well, one of the big reasons is that while most Californians can’t claim to be more than third or fourth generation, my family goes back before the Bear Flag Revolt. Two generations of us fought in it. We stole this state fare and square and it just seems like selling out my forbearers to let the bastards run me out.

ewarmour
11-26-2012, 8:31 PM
I'd love to see some of those checks signed by Bill Lockyer.

motorhead
11-26-2012, 11:37 PM
chicago morons just passed a law taxing gun sales, knowing it'd face court challenge. you just can't fix stupid!

ddestruel
11-26-2012, 11:44 PM
because what happens in CA seems to trickle into the rest of the country down the road. stupidity or not CA is one of the battle grounds where things can either be stopped rolled back or grab traction and mastisize.

I loved Montana and hated moving back to CA, but CA has alot to offer its just the politics are one sided and very interested in micro managing all of us

nullman
11-27-2012, 4:43 AM
I have a question...

from the article:

Although the Court was not required to consider whether the ordinance violated the Second Amendment (because it already determined that the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague), the Court nonetheless considered the U.S. Supreme Court decisions of District of Columbia v. Heller (which declared that a ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment) and McDonald v. Chicago (which declared that the Second Amendment is fully applicable to the States), and held that the Chicago ordinance violated the Second Amendment as well.


Does Heller address possession in the home only? I thought that possession in the home was listed as an example in the ruling, not the one and only place?

Regards,
Nick

IVC
11-27-2012, 11:06 PM
Not *only* in the home, but you are understanding it doubly wrong with your question: (1) The article you are reading is a blog, not the court ruling, so the language in the article is not even close to being authoritative or exact; (2) Even as stated, it doesn't say or imply "only." Instead, it merely states that the ban on handgun possession in the home violates the 2A, which it does.

It's a long game and rules are being made up as we speak.