Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Qoute of the Year
In sum total, what you people did was drive someplace where there wasn't a problem, complain about something you don't fully understand, get in the way of people who may actually be performing a function, and then do nothing, en masse, except hope that someone else notices your little snit and makes it all better.My god, if there's a more perfect metaphor for the modern progressive movement, I've never seen it. -- Tam, And joining hands, they made a metaphor...
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
McDonald v. Chicago Summarized
Here are the basics of the decision:
The right to keep and bear arms (RKBA) is recognized as a "fundamental right," which places it on par with freedom of speech and freedom of religion, among others. This categorization warrants "strict scrutiny" in appurtenant cases.
Strict scrutiny won't necessarily void gun registration schemes, but it will void outright bans, discretionary licensing requirements (see Scalia's discussion of "arbitrary and capricious" licensing requirements in Heller), and prohibitive taxes or licensing fees.
It should also void the Lautenberg Amendment, which extend the class of prohibited persons to those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes.
The court's recognition of the Second Amendment as protecting the RKBA especially as it relates to the right of self defense should also negate the "sporting purposes" requirement in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922.2.
McDonald did NOT strike down Chicago's handgun ban. Rather, it remanded the case to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, which had previously upheld the trial court's dismissal of the case.
It's quite possible that Chicago will revise the law to bring it into what it feels is compliance with the constitution, but this fight isn't over by a long shot.
Aside from the Chicago law, others are now ripe for being challenged, including the draconian and arbitrary pistol ownership licensing schemes in places like NYC, CA, and NJ. Additionally, the assault weapons bans in NY, NJ and CA are in jeopardy.
With the Second Amendment now recognized as protecting a fundamental right, discretionary carry license laws such as those in NY, NJ, MD, and CA may also eventually be replaced with shall-issue laws.
The right to keep and bear arms (RKBA) is recognized as a "fundamental right," which places it on par with freedom of speech and freedom of religion, among others. This categorization warrants "strict scrutiny" in appurtenant cases.
Strict scrutiny won't necessarily void gun registration schemes, but it will void outright bans, discretionary licensing requirements (see Scalia's discussion of "arbitrary and capricious" licensing requirements in Heller), and prohibitive taxes or licensing fees.
It should also void the Lautenberg Amendment, which extend the class of prohibited persons to those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes.
The court's recognition of the Second Amendment as protecting the RKBA especially as it relates to the right of self defense should also negate the "sporting purposes" requirement in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922.2.
McDonald did NOT strike down Chicago's handgun ban. Rather, it remanded the case to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, which had previously upheld the trial court's dismissal of the case.
It's quite possible that Chicago will revise the law to bring it into what it feels is compliance with the constitution, but this fight isn't over by a long shot.
Aside from the Chicago law, others are now ripe for being challenged, including the draconian and arbitrary pistol ownership licensing schemes in places like NYC, CA, and NJ. Additionally, the assault weapons bans in NY, NJ and CA are in jeopardy.
With the Second Amendment now recognized as protecting a fundamental right, discretionary carry license laws such as those in NY, NJ, MD, and CA may also eventually be replaced with shall-issue laws.
As if on Cue....
"Mayor" Daley of Chicago declares his insistence to put new gun laws in place that will make it difficult to buy guns in Chicago - even after the Supremes affirmed the right to do so against all political subdivisions. Note that he does not want to "keep guns out of the hands of felons" or "improve public safety by eliminating accidental shootings" or "reduce the dangers to children posed by guns in the home" - but he vows to make it difficult for people to buy guns - in other words, to exercise their fundamental civil rights.
He then resorts to the old Democrat myth of the "rule of law".
Hey, Dick - if you cared about the rule of law, you would be abiding by the letter and spirit of the Supreme Court decision, see?
Assclown.
He then resorts to the old Democrat myth of the "rule of law".
Hey, Dick - if you cared about the rule of law, you would be abiding by the letter and spirit of the Supreme Court decision, see?
Assclown.
Just Wondering
Why we could subdue an entire continent with Winchester '73s and the like, but can't even subdue Afghanistan with autoimatic M16s and other assorted military weapons?
The level of tribal warfare is about the same...
The level of tribal warfare is about the same...
Monday, June 28, 2010
Byrd Dead (D'ed-o)
The Deomcrat's Merry Klansman, Robert Byrd passed today.
Like Ted Kennedy's passing, this is truly a terrible tragedy.
They both died in their sleep like honest men, instead of at the hands of an angry mob.
Like Ted Kennedy's passing, this is truly a terrible tragedy.
They both died in their sleep like honest men, instead of at the hands of an angry mob.
VICTORY - AGAIN
The Supreme Court held Monday that the Constitution's Second Amendment restrains government's ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms," advancing a recent trend by the John Roberts-led bench to embrace gun rights.
By a narrow, 5-4 vote, the justices also signaled, however, that some limitations on the right could survive legal challenges.
Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right "applies equally to the federal government and the states."
The court was split along familiar ideological lines, with five conservative-moderate justices in favor of gun rights and four liberals opposed. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority.
Two years ago, the court declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess guns, at least for purposes of self-defense in the home.
That ruling applied only to federal laws. It struck down a ban on handguns and a trigger lock requirement for other guns in the District of Columbia, a federal city with a unique legal standing. At the same time, the court was careful not to cast doubt on other regulations of firearms here.
Gun rights proponents almost immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Ill, where handguns have been banned for nearly 30 years. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says those laws appear to be the last two remaining outright bans.
Lower federal courts upheld the two laws, noting that judges on those benches were bound by Supreme Court precedent and that it would be up to the high court justices to ultimately rule on the true reach of the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court already has said that most of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights serve as a check on state and local, as well as federal, laws.
Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall.
Still, Alito noted that the declaration that the Second Amendment is fully binding on states and cities "limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values."
By a narrow, 5-4 vote, the justices also signaled, however, that some limitations on the right could survive legal challenges.
Writing for the court in a case involving restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs, Justice Samuel Alito said that the Second Amendment right "applies equally to the federal government and the states."
The court was split along familiar ideological lines, with five conservative-moderate justices in favor of gun rights and four liberals opposed. Chief Justice Roberts voted with the majority.
Two years ago, the court declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess guns, at least for purposes of self-defense in the home.
That ruling applied only to federal laws. It struck down a ban on handguns and a trigger lock requirement for other guns in the District of Columbia, a federal city with a unique legal standing. At the same time, the court was careful not to cast doubt on other regulations of firearms here.
Gun rights proponents almost immediately filed a federal lawsuit challenging gun control laws in Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Ill, where handguns have been banned for nearly 30 years. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence says those laws appear to be the last two remaining outright bans.
Lower federal courts upheld the two laws, noting that judges on those benches were bound by Supreme Court precedent and that it would be up to the high court justices to ultimately rule on the true reach of the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court already has said that most of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights serve as a check on state and local, as well as federal, laws.
Monday's decision did not explicitly strike down the Chicago area laws, ordering a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling. But it left little doubt that they would eventually fall.
Still, Alito noted that the declaration that the Second Amendment is fully binding on states and cities "limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values."
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
The All Around Perfect Rifle
http://www.icollector.com/images/1159/14769/14769_0305_1_lg.jpg
Its powerful. Enough. Good for everything except the largest game. If you don't need lots of power, get it in a pistol caliber.
Its accurate. Enough. Good to 300 yards (don't let anyone fool you on this). Need more range? Get a battle rifle. Where are the majority of shots taken? Yeah. Pistol calibers still apply.
The cyclic rate approaches a semi-auto rifle. If you're good. And smooth.
It's light.
It's comfy.
It's cheap.
It's friendly. Thanks to years of westerns, it will be the last weapon ever banned. Probably.
It's gorgeous.
It was good enough for thousands of settlers in the west - it subdued an entire continent.
Its powerful. Enough. Good for everything except the largest game. If you don't need lots of power, get it in a pistol caliber.
Its accurate. Enough. Good to 300 yards (don't let anyone fool you on this). Need more range? Get a battle rifle. Where are the majority of shots taken? Yeah. Pistol calibers still apply.
The cyclic rate approaches a semi-auto rifle. If you're good. And smooth.
It's light.
It's comfy.
It's cheap.
It's friendly. Thanks to years of westerns, it will be the last weapon ever banned. Probably.
It's gorgeous.
It was good enough for thousands of settlers in the west - it subdued an entire continent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
