Supreme Court Will Hear D.C. Guns Case

[Shawn.L]

this article ran front cover of the USA TODAY today, had a really cool pic of a revolver painted like a flag....... now I want one

http://portal.tds.net/news.php?story=41504

[DaveM55]

I bought that paper this morning just for the pic of that gun!

[Azzy]

Ive said it before, but until people stand up and take to the streets as reasonable people did in the 50's for racial intolerances, we will not see real action in favor of the constitution.

If 500,000 gun owners showed up to the stairs of the Supreme Court when it tries this case, then something might be done.

Until then, we are just going to see our rights whittled away at the whims of those we supposedly grant power to.

(Heck, if 50,00 armed folks showed up for peaceful protest... but with their laws, it would just make 50,000 new felons. Some racket they have going on over us, huh?)

[knight0334]

Originally Posted by Azzy

Ive said it before, but until people stand up and take to the streets as reasonable people did in the 50's for racial intolerances, we will not see real action in favor of the constitution.

If 500,000 gun owners showed up to the stairs of the Supreme Court when it tries this case, then something might be done.

Until then, we are just going to see our rights whittled away at the whims of those we supposedly grant power to.

(Heck, if 50,00 armed folks showed up for peaceful protest... but with their laws, it would just make 50,000 new felons. Some racket they have going on over us, huh?)

I'd like to see any police department try to arrest 50,000 armed persons.

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by knight0334

I'd like to see any police department try to arrest 50,000 armed persons.

Say hello to the National Guard.

[knight0334]

Originally Posted by NineseveN

Say hello to the National Guard.

pffft... they aren't issued ammo lol

Fortunately only the Governor(s) can call forth the NG for upholding civil law in the states, and I think only Congress can call forth the NG of DC for civil law duties.

If things were to get messy after something like that, you'd find a very big split in government very similar to the Civil War. Conservative or pro-gun liberal states would side one way, anti-gun states the other and the vast majority of the USA (statewise) is pro-gun.

[Kenshin]

Originally Posted by NineseveN

Say hello to the National Guard.

DC doesn't have a National Guard. And btw 50,000 armed people is about double the amount of all of the PA national gaurd.... And we have one of the largest in the country. And keep in mind that quite a few of the national guard units are deployed to Iraq. So the military isn't in much shape atm to do anything. The last thing that the government wants to show people is pictures of armor rolling down Pennsylvania avenue....

[Mtbkski]

Here is an interesting thought.....

Quoted from GUN RIGHTS: There Are Experts And Then There Are Experts. By Don B. Kates

Believing that the amendment does not authorize an individuals right to keep and bear arms is wrong. The right to arms is an individual right. The military connotation of bearing arms does not necessarily determine the meaning of a right to bear arms. If all it meant was the right to be a soldier or serve in the military or in the Army, it would hardly be a cherished right and would never have reached constitutional status in the Bill of Rights.

The right to be a soldier does not make sense. Life in the military is dangerous and lonely, and a constitutionally protected claim or entitlement to serve in uniform does not have to exist, in order for the individuals to exist if they so choose.

Moreover, the right to bear arms does not necessarily have a military connotation because Pennsylvania, whose constitution of 1776 first used the phrase "the right to bear arms," did not even have a state militia.

In PA., therefore, the right to arms was devoid of military significance.

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by Kenshin

DC doesn't have a National Guard. And btw 50,000 armed people is about double the amount of all of the PA national gaurd.... And we have one of the largest in the country. And keep in mind that quite a few of the national guard units are deployed to Iraq. So the military isn't in much shape atm to do anything. The last thing that the government wants to show people is pictures of armor rolling down Pennsylvania avenue....

You guys are looking at it how it is now, under current presumptions...clearly an avenue exists for the contrary to happen. I'm not talking about the Nation Guard as it is. Government always has a plan for this sort of thing.

[knight0334]

Originally Posted by NineseveN

You guys are looking at it how it is now, under current presumptions...clearly an avenue exists for the contrary to happen. I'm not talking about the Nation Guard as it is. Government always has a plan for this sort of thing.

I know.. The redcoats weren't supposed to fire upon the people of Boston too. ...but we know how that turned out.

The feds see the federal government as a business. ...without any power over the people it couldn't maintain a means to stay in business. Unfortunately, we the people have allowed the government more room to grow in its ability to defend itself from the people it's supposed to serve. I'm sure the feds will do anything to defend it's own existence even in violation of the US Constitution.


====

On a side note for a couple posts up, there is a DC Guard.

http://dcng.ngb.army.mil/