|
so, arbiter....
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: |
THE highest court in the United States is set to issue a ruling for the first time in seven decades on the highly emotional issue of the constitutional right to bear arms.
The US Supreme Court's decision - on whether the right to keep and bear arms is fundamentally an individual or collective right - is expected to have a far-reaching impact on US gun control laws, experts say.
The high court has never before issued a ruling on the interpretation of the second amendment to the constitution, which states: "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."
At the centre of the case is the nation's capital city, Washington DC, which has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country.
Private possession of handguns is strictly banned there, and any rifles or shotguns kept in homes must be disassembled or kept under a trigger lock.
Washington DC government officials say the ban, instituted in 1976, is necessary to keep street violence and murder rates down, and that the second amendment protects gun rights for people associated with militias, not individuals.
"I'm confident in our case, and our continued ability to protect residents from gun violence," mayor Adrian Fenty said when he filed his legal team's brief in March.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the case, District of Columbia vs Heller, first argued in 2003 that the DC gun ban violates the citizens' second amendment rights.
Alan Gura, the lead attorney for the plaintiff, questioned the anti-crime impact of the city's laws, saying they have "accomplished nothing except to prevent law-abiding citizens from exercising their constitutional right to keep and bear arms".
Interest in the case, originally brought by a federal building guard who carries a handgun on duty and wanted to keep it in his home for self-defence, has been steadily building, as evidenced by the rash of "friend of the court" submissions to the judges filed on both sides of the argument.
Supporters of gun rights include groups as varied as Pink Pistols and Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, 126 Women State Legislatures, and the powerful gun lobby, the National Rifle Association.
The Supreme Court last took up the issue in 1939, but its ruling on a case involving alleged bank robbers and registration of certain firearms did not directly address the question of the individual versus collective right to bear arms. |
impress me with your legal acumen by predicting which way the court will rule... |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| Pkc wants to jack off while he reads your post. I can tell. |
|
|
| Frenchie |
| quote: | Originally posted by jennypie
Pkc wants to jack off while he reads your post. I can tell. |
I can smell his palms oiled up from here. |
|
|
| elFreak |
| charleton heston died lol. |
|
|
| Fledz |
The only people carrying guns around should be Law Enforcement Officers and the military. Anyone else who owns one should only use it a firing range or when hunting and should be thrown in jail for carrying one out in public. Permits should be mandatory and not given to just some random Joe.
If the rest of the world can do it and function properly, why can't the US?
"Oooooh but what if I get held up on the street with a gun, then if I can't carry one how will I defend myself?" Please....that would be far less common if it wasn't so easy to get a gun. In most other countries with good gun laws this hardly ever happens.
Having said that, the backwards thinking of the American Supreme court will not go through with this and we'll be back at square one because some group of rednecks will throw a tantrum about how they aren't allowed to carry around their double barrel shotgun so they can shoot trespassers on their lawn :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | | Pink Pistols and Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty |
:conf: |
|
|
| elFreak |
i agree, but hunting isn't only for sport. Some people still actually feed themselves this way. It is also an essential tool to control the deer population in certain places as to not further distrupt the eco system. There aren't as many natural predators and those ******s need to die.
i think only black people and mexicans should be banned from guns.;p |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by jennypie
Pkc wants to jack off while he reads your post. I can tell. |
awww, don't be jealous honey. if i wanted to ask a question about fitting huge cocks in my ass, you know i'd come to you! |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| At least you recognize that my bf has a huge cock. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by jennypie
At least you recognize that my bf has a huge cock. |
well i wasn't referring to your boy in particular. just the guys you let into your ass. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| The Packers don't count. How many times do I have to tell you that? :mad: |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| yet another intelligent thread ends with jenny getting butted. |
|
|
|
|
