Chicago Handgun Ban Ruled Unconstitutional

[Zeb_Carter]

Supreme Court rules Chicago gun ban unconstitutional
10:06 AM

The Supreme Court rules 5-4 to strike down state and local laws banning handgun possession.

Update at 10:15 a.m. ET: The court decided that the Second Amendment's right to "keep and bear arms" applies to gun controls laws at the local and state level as well as the federal.

 

[Pure]

yes, indeed, a very efficient means of population control, esp. for young males, notably those with dark skins.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

yes, indeed, a very efficient means of population control, esp. for young males, notably those with dark skins.

you're such a shrub!

 

[Pure]

iraq as a place of safety

As gun rights were extended throughout the country by SCOTUS, Chicago was recovering from another violent weekend that left at least 29 shot and three dead.

Even with the gun ban in place, shootings in Chicago have been rampant. Last weekend, at least 52 were shot and ten killed in just three days, and this weekend the gunfire continued. According to CBS, shots were fired into a group of about 30 people Sunday night--likely a crowd gathering in Uptown after the Gay Pride Parade. Two men were wounded in the incident, at least one suffered serious injuries.

CBS reports that another rash of shootings occurred between 10:45 p.m. Saturday and 4 a.m. Sunday, where at least 13 people were shot and one person was killed. Most of the incidents took place on the Northwest and Southwest sides.
===


http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/casualties/2009-05-02-may-toll_N.htm

estimated US military deaths on an average weekend in 2009 in Iraq: <2.

perhaps young Chicago men wishing for safety should enlist and request iraq duty.

 

[Weird Harold]

Even with the gun ban in place, shootings in Chicago have been rampant.

So SCOTUS overturned a useless, unenforceable, law. What's the big loss?

 

[amicus]

Thanks, Zeb...

~~~

Alito said "there is intense disagreement on the question whether the private possession of guns in the home increases or decreases gun deaths and injuries." He added: "The right to keep and bear arms … is not the only constitutional right that has controversial public safety implications."

He emphasized that Monday's ruling followed directly from the court's 2008 landmark decision that declared — for the first time — an individual right to bear arms and protection from certain firearms regulations in federal enclaves. That 2008 case, District of Columbia v. Heller, arose from a handgun ban in Washington, D.C.

Joining Alito in the majority were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. Thomas broke from the others on the legal rationale.

With Breyer in dissent were Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.

~~~

Another 5/4 majority in favor of the Conservatives...and an important decision as it affirms an individuals Constitutional Right, to keep and bear arms.

Buy your weapons now and stash them before the Liberals add another and flip the 5/4.

Amicus

 

[Emperor_Nero]

Actually, SCOTUS remanded the case back to the 7th circuit with the notation that their previous ruling on the Washington DC ban does apply to state and local laws as well as federal.

Likely, with that that direction, the 7th circuit will overturn, but the ban is still in effect.

And I wouldn't be surprised to see another appeal and another trip back to SCOTUS, which will have a different makeup by then than the one that made a 5-4 ruling today.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Kagan isnt replacing a conservative.

 

[amicus]

Then again, given a Republican Majority in the House and Senate come January, it could be a 6/4 in favor of the good guys, ehm, Conservatives.



amicus

 

[Emperor_Nero]

I never said how any changes on the court would effect a vote, just that the nine members that ruled on things today will not be the same nine that hear it the next time.

 

[Pure]

why americans need guns, esp. the poor americans

breyer, writing for the majority of the SC, present case:

The plight of Chicagoans living in high-crime areas was recently highlighted when two Illinois legislators representing Chicago districts called on the Governor to deploy the Illinois National Guard to patrol the City’s streets.31 The legislators noted that the number of Chicago homicide victims during the current year equaled the number of American soldiers killed during that same period in Afghanistan and Iraq and that 80% of the Chicago victims were black.32

Amici supporting incorporation of the right to keep and bear arms contend that the right is especially important for women and members of other groups that may be especially vulnerable to violent crime.33 If, as petitioners believe, their safety and the safety of other law-abiding members of the community would be enhanced by the possession of hand-guns in the home for self-defense, then the Second Amendment right protects the rights of minorities and other residents of high-crime areas whose needs are not being met by elected public officials.

 

[oggbashan]

How do you put the genie back in the bottle?

Handguns have been available in most US states for generations. A local ban is only likely to affect law-abiding citizens, not criminals who can acquire them in other states or by burglary.

Even in the UK that now has stringent handgun laws and has always had a very low rate of gun crime, handguns have always been available for criminals if they really wanted them. Some are modified replicas, a fairly easy task for someone with a reasonable workshop. Some are made from scratch, also easily done even if the resulting weapon might be nearly as dangerous to the user as the potential victim. Some are illegally imported from countries that have more relaxed handgun laws.

When I was younger, I knew where and when illegal handguns could be bought and the approximate prices, higher for apparently virgin weapons never yet used in a crime, lower for weapons that were already in Police records. Those sales still continue. All that the draconian handgun laws have done is raise the price.

But here, as in the US, black on black guncrime is more prevalent than in the general population.

You are more likely to die on our roads than by a handgun, and our drivers/roads have one of the lowest fatality rates in Europe.

Og

 

[amicus]

Two things here...the gun issue is being discussed on the news and it seems that even with the total ban of handguns in Chicago...there were still many hand gun crimes...they admitted that banning the guns did not work....as Oggbashan essentially confirms.

The second thing if a moment of pause to realize that five male Justices decided a Constitional Issue...declaring the individual owner ship of guns is the intent of the Constitution, while four, two of them women, disagreed.

Disagreed...

On this forum we blather and foam and try to resolve the right and wrong of issue after issue and seldom succeed...well, guess what...the best legal minds in the world cannot agree on the Constitutionality of a god-damned Amendment to the Constitution!

So it came to rest on the shoulders of five old men.

Such a deal....where can I apply?

Amicus...

 

[R. Richard]

Handguns have been available in most US states for generations. A local ban is only likely to affect law-abiding citizens, not criminals who can acquire them in other states or by burglary.

Actually a ban on handguns affects the weak most of all. A 100 lb woman with a handgun can stop a 200 lb man from entering her home, raping her and perhaps killing her children. Without a handgun, the woman is at a great disadvantage.

When I was younger, I knew where and when illegal handguns could be bought and the approximate prices, higher for apparently virgin weapons never yet used in a crime, lower for weapons that were already in Police records. Those sales still continue. All that the draconian handgun laws have done is raise the price.

Og

In the USA it's not necessary to buy a handgun to commit a crime. There are those in big cities who will rent a handgun for a percentage of the proceeds of an armed robbery.

 

[DesertPirate]

For those that think this is bad I have one question and one statement.
Question: Why has the violent crimes involving firearms in Washington, DC dropped by 60% since the repeal of the ban?

Statement: In 1982 the percentage of violent crimes involving firearms was 38%. The ban was inacted.
In 2007 (Most recent available) the violent crimes involving firearms was 78%.

Does anyone understand that hanging a sign over a place (city, school, church) that says "Nothing but targets here" does not control crime. It emboldens it!

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Actually, SCOTUS remanded the case back to the 7th circuit with the notation that their previous ruling on the Washington DC ban does apply to state and local laws as well as federal.

Likely, with that that direction, the 7th circuit will overturn, but the ban is still in effect.

And I wouldn't be surprised to see another appeal and another trip back to SCOTUS, which will have a different makeup by then than the one that made a 5-4 ruling today.

Where did you read/hear that?

 

[jlss35]

Thanks, Zeb...

~~~



~~~

Another 5/4 majority in favor of the Conservatives...and an important decision as it affirms an individuals Constitutional Right, to keep and bear arms.

Buy your weapons now and stash them before the Liberals add another and flip the 5/4.

Amicus

Kagan for Stevens = 5/4 still. Doesn't change the math.

 

[DesertPirate]

I never said how any changes on the court would effect a vote, just that the nine members that ruled on things today will not be the same nine that hear it the next time.

At worst you would exchange Stevens for Kagen. That would leave the vote the same. Swapping libs will not change the court.

 

[Emperor_Nero]

Where did you read/hear that?

Every Chicago television and radio station, ad nauseum, all day long

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Every Chicago television and radio station, ad nauseum, all day long

And I have seen no mention of that in any new article. In fact the new on the net would lead you to believe the case was decided, which would make Daley jumping mad. So who to believe?

It would appear to be true...the ban is still in effect...for now.

Daley: City will revise gun law after Supreme Court ruling
June 28, 2010 7:05 PM | 205 Comments | UPDATED STORY

Colleen Lawson, who sued Chicago over its handgun ban, and members of the Illinois State Rifle Association speak to reporters today about the Supreme Court ruling. (Michael Tercha/Tribune)

Mayor Richard Daley says the city will rewrite its gun ban ordinance because a Supreme Court ruling today has made the current law "unenforceable."

Daley said a new ordinance would be drafted soon and would protect the residents of Chicago as well as 2nd Amendment rights.

"I'm disappointed by the decision, but it's not surprising," Daley said at a news conference. "We're still reviewing the entire decision, but it means that Chicago's current handgun ban is unenforceable, so we're working to rewrite our ordinance in a reasonable and responsible way to protect 2nd Amendment rights and protect Chicagoans from gun violence."

The mayor made the announcement hours after the Supreme Court said Americans nationwide have a constitutional right to have a handgun at home for self-defense, even in cities which until now have outlawed handguns.

The 5-4 decision reversed a ruling that had upheld Chicago's ban on handguns and all but declared the 1982 ordinance unconstitutional. The justices sent the case back to Chicago for a lower court to issue the final decision, so the city's ban remains in effect for now.

 

[SeaCat]

As gun rights were extended throughout the country by SCOTUS, Chicago was recovering from another violent weekend that left at least 29 shot and three dead.

Even with the gun ban in place, shootings in Chicago have been rampant. Last weekend, at least 52 were shot and ten killed in just three days, and this weekend the gunfire continued. According to CBS, shots were fired into a group of about 30 people Sunday night--likely a crowd gathering in Uptown after the Gay Pride Parade. Two men were wounded in the incident, at least one suffered serious injuries.

CBS reports that another rash of shootings occurred between 10:45 p.m. Saturday and 4 a.m. Sunday, where at least 13 people were shot and one person was killed. Most of the incidents took place on the Northwest and Southwest sides.
===


http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/casualties/2009-05-02-may-toll_N.htm

estimated US military deaths on an average weekend in 2009 in Iraq: <2.

perhaps young Chicago men wishing for safety should enlist and request iraq duty.

Pure,

I would be interested in a demographic of both those shot and those doing ths shooting. Age, Race, Gender and legal back grounds. (ie. are the ones doing the shooting or being shot convicted criminals?) It might be interesting.

Cat

 

[Weird Harold]

perhaps young Chicago men wishing for safety should enlist and request iraq duty.

In other words, if they get trained and given a gun then get surrounded by their peers who are also carrying guns they'll be safer from the bad guys who want to shoot them?

Sounds like the training is the only difference between Chicago and Baghdad.

 

[Carnevil9]

Even with the gun ban in place, shootings in Chicago have been rampant.....

This pretty much says it all about why gun bans don't work. Might as well let the honest citizens arm themselves just like the criminals. Seems like common sense to me!.........Carney

 

[amicus]

There was a small city, a few years back that passed an ordinance that every adult citizen was required to purchase a weapon and training on how to use it.

The crime rate plummetted to almost zero.

In every city and town where people own weapons, the crime rate decreases, which brings much chagrin to the denizens of the left.

Knowing that, what is the true motivation for those who insist on imposing gun controls everywhere they can?

Mull that over, as I am, and see what you come up with...

Amicus

 

[Pure]

guns bring peace

amicus There was a small city, a few years back that passed an ordinance that every adult citizen was required to purchase a weapon and training on how to use it.

The crime rate plummetted to almost zero.

In every city and town where people own weapons, the crime rate decreases, which brings much chagrin to the denizens of the left.
====

a nice fantasy, perhaps? any refs? any evidence? what's the state of this near-zero-crime' city, now.

the swiss males all receive training in the militia; they are to keep a gun and ammo at home and be ready to be called up with the gun in hand. a far different kettle of fish than the one Ami imagines.

in Switzerland (pop. 7.6 million), there were about 30 killings or attempted killings with firearms, in 2006; or a rate of about 1, per 250,000 per year.

New York City (about 8 million) had about 500 murders in 2007 (the previous year, 600), or a rate of 1 per 16,000 residents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...owest-level-thanks-zero-tolerance-policy.html