The Heller Decision Vs. Executive Order?

[billt]

Just a few short months ago gun owners were celebrating the Heller Supreme Court decision. Now we're quaking in our boots about what Obama might do when inaugurated with an "Executive Order". How will one fair against the other from a legal standpoint? Just how much damage can Obama do, and how much, if any, could be prevented by the Heller decision? It seems that once again, gun owners are fighting a losing battle regardless how much we win. Bill T.

[LorDiego01]

I thought the Heller Decision wasn't as good as most gun owners wanted it to be.

It seemed to end up justifying all kinds of limiting laws that were already in the books.

Regardless, I'm sure that Obama could do a lot of damage with executive orders, I doubt he could do more damage than Bush did, either way, if he started dictating law from his desk, in the form of E.O., I'd imagine he'd have an overnight revolt.

Highly unlikely.

[Dredly]

The heller decision basically said "Yes people can own guns" (I believe)

It never went into detail about what kind of guns, how the guns had to be purchased, how much guns can be taxed... etc

Obama isn't going to take away our guns, he is just going to make it insanely difficult to get new ones.

[pacodelahoya]

Now we're quaking in our boots about what Obama might do when inaugurated with an "Executive Order".

I'm not quaking in my boots, I'm buying ammo, already have the guns, and am steadying myself for whatever might come.

I have drawn my line in the sand and when it is crossed I hope that I will live(or die) like a man.

Determined and resolved yes. Quaking? No, at least not yet, and hopefully it will be just the odinary jitters.

[billt]

I believe it was Clinton who used Executive Order as a type of "Kings Decree" stopping certain types of surplus military ammunition from being sold to civilians. This is why you see so much "demilled" military ammo components. They can no longer sell it as "whole" ammunition. The danger is there, and it is real. Bill T.

[headcase]

First of all, Heller didn't even force fucking D.C. to do what it was sued over, so why would it mean anything to anyone else? Figure that one out before using it as a bedrock opposite to Obama gun control.....

[625]

All I know is that this is going to be a long four years. I think it could be the perfect time for Obama to force some anti 2nd Amendment EO's on us. Everyone is distracted with the whole financial mess, so there may be less outrage. I don't know. I hope I'm wrong. I do think that BO has many or most of his EO's already written. Many of those will no doubt overturn Bush's EO's. Anyway, the Heller decision didn't seem to change much in DC. People there still can't own or carry handguns because of all of the other whacky laws, right?

[deputy]

Originally Posted by Dredly

The heller decision basically said "Yes people can own guns" (I believe)

It never went into detail about what kind of guns, how the guns had to be purchased, how much guns can be taxed... etc

Obama isn't going to take away our guns, he is just going to make it insanely difficult to get new ones.

I agree with you 100%. The decision upheld the right to keep firearms in your own home. Okay but anti-gunners are on the other side saying; ok keep that gun in your home, good luck getting ammo for it. It will take another lawsuit to settle this debate, but I can see Obama waiting until some of the Justices retire(etc.) before letting it go to the SCOTUS again. I also made mention before about how a PD in NY is asking pistol applicants about there current prescription drug use. All of the sudden now that comes up? Coincidence? Nope it is the start of things to come.

[rwilson452]

D.C. Vs. Heller wasn't the big win we wanted but it was big. It drove a stake in the heart of the collective right argument. That was a big step. No, it didn't much else than that. Yes we will have many more court cases to fight to realize the full meaning of the 2nd. Incorporation is the fight that is going on now. I would not expect a definitive outcome on that for at least two years. If, again IF, we gain incorporation then the fight really starts.

The court didn't touch bearing arms. there is a hint. I see a hint that the present court would come down on the side of "Shall Issue" as to concealed firearms permits. Can we get it to the court before it turns more liberal? Don't know.

[phillyd2]

Look for our new President to be more pragmatic then you expect about such hot button issues like guns. Forget what he would like to do - look at what he will do given the laws of politics.

Hate to say this girls but he appears to me a very smart guy and will not likely make the same mistake Clinton did in his first two years - which ended up losing the Congress in a big way to the other side just two years later.

Just my prediction.