RSSFederal Court Strikes Down DC Gun Ban!
J.J. Jackson* | March 12, 2007
The second amendment is pretty darn clear saying that the right of the people to keep and bear arms “shall not” be infringed. However liberals have over the years somehow managed to translate “shall not” as “shall not unless we the smart people decide otherwise”. On March 9th however a federal appeals court has reversed some of DC’s long standing gun control laws.
The case argued
Appellants, six residents of the District, challenge D.C.
Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4), which generally bars the registration of handguns (with an exception for retired D.C. police officers); D.C. Code § 22-4504, which prohibits carrying a pistol without a license, insofar as that provision would prevent a registrant from moving a gun from one room to another within his or her home; and D.C. Code § 7-2507.02, requiring that all lawfully owned firearms be kept unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device.
Of course any thinking person can see this for exactly what the origninal law was, an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment. It’s pretty pointless to “bear” a disassembled gun or even one that is bound by a trigger lock.
“Wait, don’t rob me … I just need a second to unlock my gun.” – Typical helpless victim in DC
The problem with this case however is that it only applies to being allowed to have the guns in one’s home. What was not argued was how stupid and unconstitutional DC gun laws were when they prevented the carrying (i.e. bearing) of arms outside of one’s home.
The opinion (available at Drudge) is a thoroughly footnoted and researched document that basically debunks every argument used by the gun grabbers in an attempt to disarm the people in order to make them more subservient to the state.
But even such plain language was not enough to keep Circuit Judge Karen Henderson from dissenting in a poorly written and scatterbrained opinion that rehashes fallacies and basically amounts to an illogical argument designed to continue to promote the denial of rights clearly spelled out in the Constitution to citizens. She even admits that the right of the people to keep and bears arms was designed to protect people against an oppressive state government (although she completely ignores self defense as a valid use - huh?) but never addresses how exactly being required to keep arms disassembled and locked away actually helps a person when the oppressive government comes calling.
Ms. Henderson uses as her defense basically an assortment of other unconstitutional laws in order to justify her (I guess we have to call it) opinion and demonstrates the exact reason why our founders wrote impeachment and the terms for which judges may serve (i.e. only in good behavior) and why sometimes we have to exercise those powers to remove dangerous individuals like this from power.
The battle isn’t over. The gun grabbers will return. And only could insane liberals blinded by their own desire for power read so much into something so simple as the Second Amendment.
You wanted it spelled out plain and simple without all the legal jargon? Here are direct quotes from the founders:
“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”
- Alexander Hamilton
“That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms … “
- Samuel Adams
“[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
-James Madison
“To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government.”
- John Adams
“No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
- Thomas Jefferson
“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”
- Patrick Henry
“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.”
- Zacharia Johnson
“The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpation of power by rulers. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers”
- Joseph Story
“The right [to bear arms] is general. It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the laws, are liable to the performance of military duty…The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose.”
- Thomas M. Cooley
So put all that in your pipes and smoke it. And stop being generally obstinate because you can’t make words say whatever you want them to to make it easier to further your desire for arbitrary power.
Contributor's website: http://www.libertyreborn.com
*Content posted by a user may not be completely written by that user. Content from another source is cited in either block quotes, with quotes or with a link to the original material. Content from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use. Each user is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or it's owner.
Comments
4 Responses to “Federal Court Strikes Down DC Gun Ban!”
Leave a Reply
By posting a comment you agree to abide by the rules of this site.
Loading ...
-
Recommended Reading:
-
Well, I’m not to concerned about what the “founding fathers” say about freedom, political theory, and such; they were slave-owning land-stealing indian-killers. Nonetheless, I support the freedom of every person to do whatever they wish insofar as they do not offensively harm anyone else. Accordingly, I support the right to self-defense and gun-ownership. Thanks!
So what you are basically saying is that you don’t care what the founders said but that you agree with them even though they were “they were slave-owning land-stealing indian-killers”?
Boy your understanding of American history is pretty shallow if that’s all you think the founding fathers were and making such a broad generalization. I think you need to read Mr. Jackson’s writings some more … the education will do you good.
“Boy your understanding of American history is pretty shallow if that’s all you think the founding fathers were and making such a broad generalization. I think you need to read Mr. Jackson’s writings some more … the education will do you good.”
Right on Ron. Sounds like a public school education here.
And can I add something else? Now remember this is coming from someone who is of American Indian heritage. Even my ancestors were “indian-killers”. They fought brutal wars against each other so what difference does it make when the “white man” came and did the same? Especially considering that often times such conflicts were if not started, at least instigated by my ancestors?
Oh, btw they owned slaves too …