McDonald: Reversed and Remanded

[smallshot13]

This is one of the most pertinent posts in this thread. Those CalGunners who have posted their very strong support for JB should be contacting him/his campaign immediately and requesting proactive response.

Is there a longer list of previous court cases decided prominantly on the lack of a 2A like clause in the CA constitution? Those should be brought up to JB as well, challenging their basis of decision and requesting review and consideration of invalidation of the specific statutes they were decided on.

[bobswire]

Good news and be thankful it's a close call at 5-4 , it represents the even divide of our country. I'm liberal in some things and conservative on others. I don't want either side to
enjoy Carte Blanche.

[R7MR7M]

brady wiki

I wish I had seen that brady wiki page when it still showed the hate group reference. It appears as though it has been modified to remove that portion.

[heist1]

Due process is b.s. the constitution says PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES.. article 4 section 2

[wildhawker]

Really not pertinent or well-founded advice.

This is one of the most pertinent posts in this thread. Those CalGunners who have posted their very strong support for JB should be contacting him/his campaign immediately and requesting proactive response.

Is there a longer list of previous court cases decided prominantly on the lack of a 2A like clause in the CA constitution? Those should be brought up to JB as well, challenging their basis of decision and requesting review and consideration of invalidation of the specific statutes they were decided on.

[advocatusdiaboli]

Democratic Sen. Diane Feinstein of California said she is "extremely dismayed" by the decision, which she said holds "that common sense state and local gun laws across the country now will be subject to federal lawsuits."

"This decision and its predecessor -- the District of Columbia v. Heller -- have essentially disregarded the precedent anti-constitutional and rights abridging travesty of 71 years embedded in the United States v. Miller, a 1939 case," she said.

There fixed it for you and her as well

[dantodd]

From the article:

In the 19th century, the court limited the reach of the Bill of Rights and said it put limits only on the federal government.

Is this really true? If so, this is the most surprising thing I've read all day.

Not quite. It was actually the intention for the founders that the Bill of Rights should apply only to the Federal Government, it was not a 19th century construct. The entire purpose of the 14th amendment was to extend those protections to people (primarily blacks) in the South who were being re-subjugated by various laws and codes (known as black codes) in the wake of their emancipation via the Civil War.

It is a shame that so many of us were so poorly informed in school. I too knew nothing of this until McDonald made it important to my daily life.

[gunRfun]

In celebration of today, I am going to buy a new handgun or new lower.

[advocatusdiaboli]

It was actually the intention for the founders that the Bill of Rights should apply only to the Federal Government, it was not a 19th century construct. The entire purpose of the 14th amendment was to extend those protections to people (primarily blacks) in the South who were being re-subjugated by various laws and codes (known as black codes) in the wake of their emancipation via the Civil War.

It is a shame that so many of us were so poorly informed in school. I too knew nothing of this until McDonald made it important to my daily life.

Me as well. I thank Gene H and 7x57 for prodding me into actually reading up on this. It is a monumental shame that every child educated in this nation doesn't learn the fundamental principles and history behind the rights that have made the US a unique nation--both over 2 centuries ago at its founding and still today.

Today, we became even more unique. I believe we are unique in the G20 (ironically meeting right now) in being allowed the possession of firearms as a basic right.

[louisianagirl]

I can't believe the fate of our rights as Americans were hinged on a 5-4 decision. My God!

no. the fate of the court hinged on the decision. our fate is ours alone to decide as long as we remain armed heavily enough to dictate it.

[freonr22]

17,000+ Views!!!!!!!

[mzimmers]

It is a monumental shame that every child educated in this nation doesn't learn the fundamental principles and history behind the rights that have made the US a unique nation--both over 2 centuries ago at its founding and still today.

Well, in defense of the educators who had the misfortune of having me in their classes, it's quite possible this topic was accurately covered, but I was oblivious to it. To say history was my worst subject is an understatement...despite being a Phi Beta Kappa student in college, I got my first "A" in history -- that is, first in my life -- in my final quarter of my senior year at Cal.

But I still find it amazing that this is true. So, the founding fathers wished to protect us from the evils of an oppressive federal government, but they were OK with subordinate governments co-opting civil liberties? I'm not saying I dispute this, but it sure sounds hard to believe.

[Rossi357]

!!!!!YES!!!!!

Someone has been doing some Wiki editing.

[dantodd]

But I still find it amazing that this is true. So, the founding fathers wished to protect us from the evils of an oppressive federal government, but they were OK with subordinate governments co-opting civil liberties? I'm not saying I dispute this, but it sure sounds hard to believe.

It is important to put the Constitution in context. It was written to replace the Articles of Confederation. The Articles created a confederation of independent nations, each "state" was a nation at this time and as nations they each had their own founding documents that spelled out the powers of the states. The reason the Bill of Rights was written and added to the constitution was to assure the several states that the new Federal Government was not going to usurp their police powers within their own borders. As such the primary purpose of the BoR was a restriction on Federal interference in what the states, at that time, saw as their (and their citizens') most fundamental rights. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution and BoR there were some states who had official state religions which the BoR expressly prohibited the Feds from doing.

[Sinixstar]

Well that's what those New Yorkers get when they vote for morons like Bloomberg.

Oh, wait...

I'm not familiar with Bloomberg having any idea of his own in terms of fighting crime, or even gun control. He basically carrying Giuliani's torch on those issues...