Guns in the news

[guyver]

Got this off foxnews.com

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court, upholding California's assault-weapons ban, decided that the Second Amendment does not guarantee individuals the right to bear arms.

The three-judge panel's unanimous ruling Thursday conflicts with Attorney General John Ashcroft's interpretation of the Second Amendment and with a 2001 ruling by the federal appeals in New Orleans.

The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said the amendment's right to bear arms is intended to maintain effective state militias and is not an individual right.

"The historical record makes it equally plain that the amendment was not adopted in order to afford rights to individuals with respect to private gun ownership or possession," Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is the same federal court that ruled earlier this year that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the separation of church and state.

National Rifle Association spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said it was too early to know how Thursday's ruling will affect the gun rights debate, but he said the NRA was disappointed.

"For 131 years we've been standing steadfastly to protect the freedoms of all law abiding Americans and stand steadfastly that the Second Amendment is an individual right and will continue to do so," Arulanandam said.

The amendment reads, in full: "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."

In its ruling last year, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans said the Second Amendment does protect an individual's right to bear arms, but that those rights are subject to narrowly tailored restrictions.

Ashcroft has said that the Second Amendment gives individuals the right to bear arms, compelling a flood of defendants to petition federal judges to vacate their weapons convictions.

Judges, however, have balked at the petitions and upheld the laws prohibiting felons from possessing firearms and other gun prohibitions. Many of those cases are on appeal.

Attorneys for the gun owners who sued in the case decided Thursday did not return telephone calls seeking comment on whether they would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The appellate court said the high court's guidance on the gun control issue has been "not entirely illuminating."

In 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a federal law prohibiting the interstate transport of sawed-off shotguns. The Supreme Court found that the weapon in question was not suitable for use in the militia and therefore not constitutionally protected.

In Thursday's case, weapons owners challenged 1999 amendments to the 1989 California law that outlawed 75 high-powered weapons with rapid-fire capabilities.

The initial law, enacted in response to a 1989 schoolyard shooting in Stockton that killed five children and wounded 30, banned certain makes and models of firearms. The amendments banned additional "copycat" weapons based on a host of features, instead of particular models.

"While I respect the rights of Californians to pursue hunting and sports shooting, and of law-abiding citizens to protect their homes and businesses, there is no need for these military style weapons to be on the streets in our state," said Bill Lockyer, California's attorney general.

Following California's lead, several states and the federal government have passed similar or stricter bans.

The 9th Circuit has been known for rulings to the left of its peers.

In June, another 9th Circuit panel ruled that the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance was an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion. Reinhardt voted with the majority in that 2-1 ruling, which is on hold pending appeal.

The case is Silveira v. Lockyer, 01-15098

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

Kind of sucks. While I prefer that nobody be armed, it is foolish to deny armas to the citizens once the criminals possess credible firepower.

[Manji]

What these idiots never realise when they trot out that "It's for the militia" argument is that every single citizen of the United States of America is by defenition a militiaman. The majority of them just don't know it. And certainly these excuses for judges don't.

Hence, every citizen of the United States of America is entitled to assault rifles, grenade launchers, and even battle tanks if they can afford them.

[Coyote]

The 9th circuit is the most left-wing of all the SC's-- and they are also the largest, most inefficient, and have the most decisions overruled by the US Supreme Court.

And as we all know, places like New York, Washington DC, and Los Angeles are all crime-free havens since the banning of weapons there, while places like Boise Idaho, where everyone and their dog has a gun, is in the news every single day with a fresh massacre...

[Sea Skimmer]

Get rid of that fucking huge image in your sig for face the flames!

[meNNis]

What these idiots never realise when they trot out that "It's for the militia" argument is that every single citizen of the United States of America is by defenition a militiaman. The majority of them just don't know it. And certainly these excuses for judges don't.

Hence, every citizen of the United States of America is entitled to assault rifles, grenade launchers, and even battle tanks if they can afford them.

[qoute="Coyote"]The 9th circuit is the most left-wing of all the SC's-- and they are also the largest, most inefficient, and have the most decisions overruled by the US Supreme Court.

And as we all know, places like New York, Washington DC, and Los Angeles are all crime-free havens since the banning of weapons there, while places like Boise Idaho, where everyone and their dog has a gun, is in the news every single day with a fresh massacre...
[/qoute]

i agree with both of ya. that circuit is a bunch of dumbasses.
*grabs shotgun* im gonna get me some judges!

[meNNis]

damned hashed code and lack of an edit button

[phongn]

damned hashed code and lack of an edit button

What are you talking about? There's an edit button in the OT forum!

[Admiral Piett]

grenade launchers, and even battle tanks if they can afford them.

And intercontinental nuclear tipped ballistic missiles? I would love driving around with this

http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/start1/ ... 5cnmlb.jpg



LINK LARGE IMAGES!

[guyver]

I bet that is great on gas. But must suck to find a parking space.

[NecronLord]

No let him keep the spartan helmet as a symbol of his freedoms and citizenship. OK so the spartans were a bunch of peodophilliac warmongering child-beating slave owners. If Manji wants to claim association with them, who are we to stop him?

[Admiral Piett]

I bet that is great on gas. But must suck to find a parking space.

No need to find parking space.It creates it

[guyver]

I bet that is great on gas. But must suck to find a parking space.

No need to find parking space.It creates it

LOL

[NecronLord]

I bet that is great on gas. But must suck to find a parking space.

No need to find parking space.It creates it

New meaning to the phrase "Radioactive parking lot?"

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

You mean 'Hot Spot", right?

[Coyote]

Admiral Piett, I like your new SUV, but how do you deal with having a wild-eyed Anna Nichole Smith chasing you all the time?

[Admiral Piett]

Admiral Piett, I like your new SUV, but how do you deal with having a wild-eyed Anna Nichole Smith chasing you all the time?

By switching vehicle.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/slbm/941_0.jpg

[guyver]

Great now the woman will love him. He's got a boat!!!!!!

[C.S.Strowbridge]

What these idiots never realise when they trot out that "It's for the militia" argument is that every single citizen of the United States of America is by defenition a militiaman. The majority of them just don't know it. And certainly these excuses for judges don't.

Hence, every citizen of the United States of America is entitled to assault rifles, grenade launchers, and even battle tanks if they can afford them.

It doesn't say Militia, it says well organized militia (or something to that effect, I don't feel like looking up the exact quote.) Therefore, if you don't know you're in a militia, then it's not well organized enough for constitutional protection.

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

Great now the woman will love him. He's got a boat!!!!!!

Well, good luck parking the damn thing...

[Admiral Piett]

The Kondensator 2P,the 16 inches caliber soviet atomic gun.

[guyver]

You do like big items. What about somethhing a little smaller? Say a Hum V with a TOW on top.

[Captain tycho]

What these idiots never realise when they trot out that "It's for the militia" argument is that every single citizen of the United States of America is by defenition a militiaman. The majority of them just don't know it. And certainly these excuses for judges don't.

Hence, every citizen of the United States of America is entitled to assault rifles, grenade launchers, and even battle tanks if they can afford them.

Hell, Bill Gates might as well buy an aircraft carrier and a couple of dozen of AEGIS cruisers, not to mention a couple dozen nukes.

[Alyeska]

Personally I have no problem with private citizens owning things like M2 .50cal machineguns or assault rifles, but only if they are willing to jump through the hoops and shell out the cash.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

It doesn't say Militia, it says well organized militia (or something to that effect, I don't feel like looking up the exact quote.) Therefore, if you don't know you're in a militia, then it's not well organized enough for constitutional protection.

The exact text:

'A well-regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'

From an 18th century (grammatical) perspective, considering the grammatical structure of the text, the thrust of the sentence is basically that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon, as an armed populace is a requisite to the formation of a militia necessary for the defence of the State. The well-regulated portion would apply only to the Militia. That would have been the intent of those composing the sentence.