PDA

View Full Version : Majority of Hill Stands Against D.C. Gun Ban


tombinghamthegreat
02-07-2008, 9:06 PM
Majority of Hill Stands Against D.C. Gun Ban
Members to File Friend-of-the-Court Brief in 2nd Amendment Case Before Justices

By Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 8, 2008; Page A02

A majority of the Senate and more than half of the members of the House will file a brief today urging the Supreme Court to uphold a ruling that the District's handgun ban violates the Second Amendment.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.), who led the effort to file the friend-of-the-court brief, said her staff could not find another instance in which such a large portion of Congress had taken a position on an issue before the court.

"This court should give due deference to the repeated findings over different historical epochs by Congress, a co-equal branch of government, that the amendment guarantees the personal right to possess firearms," their brief contends.

"The District's prohibitions on mere possession by law-abiding persons of handguns in the home and having usable firearms there are unreasonable."

District of Columbia v. Heller, scheduled for argument March 18, offers the Supreme Court a chance to settle years of debate over whether the Second Amendment -- "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" -- guarantees an individual right to possess firearms or a "collective" civic right related to military service.

Last spring, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2 to 1 that the right is an individual one, and because handguns should be considered "arms," it is unconstitutional to ban them. The District has the nation's most-restrictive law.

The Bush administration, in a brief filed by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement, said such a categorical approach could endanger federal gun control measures, such as a ban on private possession of new machine guns. Clement proposed that the court recognize an individual right but send D.C.'s law back to lower courts to determine whether it is an unreasonable restriction.

Hutchison and Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), who spoke at a Heritage Foundation event yesterday, said the court could find D.C.'s law unconstitutional without another trip through the courts and without endangering Congress's ability to pass other gun control legislation, such as banning assault weapons.

All Senate Republicans except three -- Virginia's maverick Sen. John W. Warner was one of the missing -- signed on to the brief. Nine Democratic senators -- Virginia's other maverick, Sen. James Webb was among them -- joined the effort. The total was 55 senators and 250 House members, 68 of whom were Democrats.

Webb campaigned in 2006 as a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. Warner said in a statement he stayed out of the case because of respect for home rule.

"While the District of Columbia is not a state, it operates under a framework of laws enacted by the Congress which gives its elected leaders the duty to advocate the positions and interest of its citizens before the federal judiciary," he said.

Virginia will file with a large number of other states on behalf of those challenging D.C.'s law. Maryland has joined a smaller group of states urging the court to reverse the lower court's opinion, and the state's two Democratic senators did not join Hutchison's brief.

The House voted to overturn the D.C. ban in 2004, but supporters failed to muster enough votes in the Senate.

Solidmch
02-07-2008, 9:15 PM
lots of talk. Lets see what SCOTUS has for us.

mymonkeyman
02-07-2008, 10:09 PM
"A majority of the Senate and more than half of the members of the House."

That sounds a bit awkward. A majority and "more than half" are the same thing...

Also, if a majority of the house and senate wanted to get rid of the D.C. gun ban, why didn't they do it earlier? (Not that I'd want them to do it now before our moment of glory). Congress can always override DC law.

We'll have to wait. Oral arguments should be up on SCOTUS's transcript website (http://supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts.html) on March 18 in the late afternoon. Of course, there will probably be MSM coverage earlier than that on the same day.

yellowfin
02-07-2008, 11:49 PM
The Bush administration, in a brief filed by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement, said such a categorical approach could endanger federal gun control measures, such as a ban on private possession of new machine guns. Uhm...and the problem with that would be???

DedEye
02-08-2008, 12:15 AM
Uhm...and the problem with that would be???

Nothing in my mind :43:.

It certainly would suck for everyone that bought NFA MGs after the '86 manufacturing ban...

CCWFacts
02-08-2008, 12:30 AM
Nothing in my mind :43:.

Me neither. That law needs to be removed. It's wrong that people in much of Europe have legal paths to owning new MGs, and we don't.

It certainly would suck for everyone that bought NFA MGs after the '86 manufacturing ban...

Sure would. Their $15,000 M16 investment suddenly becomes just another $1200 AR-15 + $100 worth of parts + $200 tax stamp.

ibanezfoo
02-08-2008, 8:11 AM
Uhm...and the problem with that would be???

They couldn't install RFID chips and go through with all the other anti-freedom Nazi crap they want to do.

-Bryan

ghettoshecky
02-08-2008, 12:17 PM
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE BUSH ADMIN. IS SUDDENLY AGAINST A REPEAL OF THE FULL AUTO BAN!!! If there was one thing for sure I chose Bush over Kerry is the fact that Bush has a better record on respecting second amendment rights than Kerry....guess the record isn't that much better....

Fjold
02-08-2008, 12:53 PM
What's scary is that 45 Senators and 175 Representatives don't believe that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right of the people.

PonchoTA
02-08-2008, 1:11 PM
What's scary is that 45 Senators and 175 Representatives don't believe that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right of the people.
VERY good point. I want the names of those reps, and we should get all of our friends in those other states too to start petitions there to either get them to reverse their positions, or get replaced.

Personally, I'm on a couple of different missions to remove Boxer and Lois Capps from Congress. They are both useless. Luckily, DiFi is close to retirement, probably within the next year IIRC, and hopefully, "we the people" will get someone better in office than that *****.

I hate those 3 and Pelosi with every fiber of my being, and am willing to do whatever I can (within legal bounds of course) to get them booted out of their offices. They should be ashamed of the stances they have taken, but they don't, they are typical Democrats. :mad:

Blacktail 8541
02-08-2008, 5:11 PM
Well, here in Cali we know of 2 right off the "bat". Boxer and Feinstien.

otteray
02-09-2008, 7:30 AM
Here's some more antis.
Sam Farr misrepresents me.
From http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2008/02/08/more_heller_briefs/


Representative Sam Farr (CA-17)
Representative Michael Honda (CA-15)
Representative Zoe Lofgren (CA-16)
Representative Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Representative Lynn C. Woolsey (CA-06)