City ponders 'Plan B' if justices void gun ban

[GGReporter]

D.C. officials said yesterday a decision by the Supreme Court to strike down the District's 32-year-old ban on handguns would force them to revamp the city's stringent gun-control statutes.

More...

[Deep13]

Well, du-u-uh. That's the whole point of the lawsuit.

Frankly, I'm not very hopeful that SCOTUS will rule that way. Some people may think with a "conservative" majority on the court and gun rights being a "conservative" issue, that it is a slam dunk. The problem is that the label means something different to the bench than it does to elected officials. Generally, judicially conservative means reluctance to strike down a law, adherence to precident and favoring governmental authority rather than individual liberty. My guess is that Kennedy and Roberts will follow existing precident finding that the 2nd Amend. does not include any rights of individuals. If Stevens, Souter and the Clinton appointees agree, then lawsuits of this type will be precluded for the foreseeable future. On the other hand if some of those four see this as an issue of individual rights (which is what judicial liberalism favors) and join Scalia and his two clones in a plurality opinion, then the DC law gets struck and similar laws in places like NYC will then be litigated based on the new precident.

[mitch_mckee]

I find it amazing that the gun grabbers use the same tired reasons to ban guns in D.C. that they used way back when Florida enacted the earliest CCW in the 1980's. "Blood in the streets" "Citizens shooting up schools, work, out of control" "No control! No Control! No Control!"

Control is what they are about.

Same crap, different century.

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

I find it amazing that the gun grabbers use the same tired reasons to ban guns in D.C. that they used way back when Florida enacted the earliest CCW in the 1980's. "Blood in the streets" "Citizens shooting up schools, work, out of control" "No control! No Control! No Control!"

Control is what they are about.

Same crap, different century.

Listening to the BBC last night, they kept referring to gun freedoms as the Wild Wild West... I could not help but laugh... boy are they uninformed...

Idiots...

[mitch_mckee]

Originally Posted by LarryO1970

Listening to the BBC last night, they kept referring to gun freedoms as the Wild Wild West... I could not help but laugh... boy are they uninformed...

Idiots...

Yes, and considering how their crime rate flew out the roof after the Brit gun ban.

I'd rather have the wild, wild West than a Neanderthal Britain where the biggest thug with a big club rules the street.

[LarryO1970]

Anise Jenkins, president of a coalition called Stand Up for Democracy in D.C., defended the district's prohibition on handguns.

"We feel our local council knows what we need for a good standard of life and to keep us safe," Jenkins said.


... and where does Washington D.C. sit as one of America's most violent cities? What is the murder rate vs. a city with legal handgun ownership? Does this person see the slums in Washington D.C. and then boast about the good standard of living? Apparently not...

Truly, now what is this moron smoking?

[TXplt]

I believe one needs to recognize Self Defense as an inherent right. Others can't keep you "safe" -- only you can do that (in any venture). Self defense is a basic human right which can be augmented by, but never delegated to, others.

[mitch_mckee]

Originally Posted by LarryO1970

Anise Jenkins, president of a coalition called Stand Up for Democracy in D.C., defended the district's prohibition on handguns.

"We feel our local council knows what we need for a good standard of life and to keep us safe," Jenkins said.


... and where does Washington D.C. sit as one of America's most violent cities? What is the murder rate vs. a city with legal handgun ownership? Does this person see the slums in Washington D.C. and then boast about the good standard of living? Apparently not...

Truly, now what is this moron smoking?

Gun control is not about crime control, it's about citizen control

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by TXplt

I believe one needs to recognize Self Defense as an inherent right. Others can't keep you "safe" -- only you can do that (in any venture). Self defense is a basic human right which can be augmented by, but never delegated to, others.

You hit it on the head there... self defense is nobody else's job other than your own. The police are NOT your private security detail and for the most part, are reactionary.

You're on your own until they get there to "assist" ... it is reality.

[TXplt]

Thanks,

I really hope this thing goes our way, but the transcript had alot of minutia and trigger locks kind of questions ?! Maybe it's to establish a link with a broader scheme of law after reading all the submissions to the court; maybe they're just touching up some finer points. Also, maybe it's to look at a narrow initial ruling on a narrow law. But didn't see alot of the "get it" factor as to how the 2nd is designed as a safety valve preventing individual enslavement of a populace by a government that got out of hand and (credibly) protecting the other individual rights and liberties. Also, alot of "reasonability" types of questions and responses which is never good. Could you see folks "reasonably" limiting speech and writings on a whim (I know about the fire in a theater argument, but affirmed rights favor the absolute). Hope for the best.

[Big Dog]

The sheer gall of these Gun-grabber idiots is simply amazing. I watched, on national TV, the Mayor of DC actually say, with a straight face, that the 'ban on handguns has resulted in a reduction in violent crime' . . . This in the long-standing "Murder Capitol of the US"!!

I don't know how someone this brain-dead can function in society, let alone be a civic 'leader'. These people NEED to be shown the Unemployment Line immediately!! Vote the fools out, vote common sense in!!

GUN CONTROL only punishes the honest law-abiding citizen. There is a reason 'Criminals' are called that.