Page 1 of 20 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 195

Thread: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

  1. #1
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,751

    U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to weigh in on whether gun owners have a constitutional right to carry handguns outside the home.
    The court decided not to hear a challenge to a New Jersey state law that requires people who want to carry handguns to show they have a special reason before they can get a permit. The court has shown a reluctance to wade in on the issue in recent months, declining to hear cases that challenged similar regulations in New York and Maryland.
    'Ya know, I am kind of in the middle regarding this issue. I do feel that background checks should be necessary so that criminals and crazy people cannot legally purchase a gun. However, once passing a background check, I very strongly feel that carrying a gun is a constitutional right, per the second amendment. I believe the members of the Supreme Court are being cowards in avoiding this issue. And since this is the Roberts court, I am somewhat surprised, not to mention deeply disappointed.

    Discussion?

    Article is here.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #2
    Guru
    Chaddelamancha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    09-22-17 @ 12:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,546

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Just doing some quick research and ran across this: McDonald v. Chicago - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The synopsis is
    the Supreme Court, in a 5–4 decision, reversed the Seventh Circuit's decision, holding that the Second Amendment was incorporated under the Fourteenth Amendment thus protecting those rights from infringement by local governments.
    It seems pretty obvious to me that NJ requiring a special reason to carry a gun infringes on the second amendment.

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    'Ya know, I am kind of in the middle regarding this issue. I do feel that background checks should be necessary so that criminals and crazy people cannot legally purchase a gun. However, once passing a background check, I very strongly feel that carrying a gun is a constitutional right, per the second amendment. I believe the members of the Supreme Court are being cowards in avoiding this issue. And since this is the Roberts court, I am somewhat surprised, not to mention deeply disappointed.

    Discussion?

    Article is here.
    Hail to the King baby!

  3. #3
    Relentless Thinking Fury
    ChezC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,139

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Obviously this is a political motivated decision that comes from outside influence. It would seem to me that by declining such a case it gives reason to suspect that the decision on the law would be in favor of the gun owners. As the article states, setting a precedence which would threaten the stranglehold liberal NY and Maryland have on its citizens, tearing to shreds the charade of freedom, exposing and eliminating the soft despotism which is in place there as it regards guns would cause quite an upset.

    We've a coward in the WH, we've a bunch of cowards in Congress, why would anyone think the Judicial branch of government would be free and clear of cowards?

  4. #4
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,601

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    The decision not to make a ruling is, in effect, making a ruling to let the lower court's ruling stand. This is the most ridiculous malfunction of our SCOTUS the second most being ruling only on some obscure point of law used in a lower court's decision and thus skirting the basic issue entirely.

    The 2A is a compound right of the people to keep and bear arms. I can see no logic in allowing a state to require a permit to carry (bear) a gun yet not to simply possess (keep) one. That likens the constitutional right of gun use to the state issued privilege of driving; you may only drive your car on public roadways after paying a hefty registration fee and then renting additional permission from the state (acquiring a driver's license) to do so.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  5. #5
    Sage
    Winchester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,482

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    I personally would like to see a lawsuit challenging the need for a CCW permit in the first place.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    NE WI.
    Last Seen
    08-30-15 @ 03:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,029

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    `
    In my humble opinion; SCOTUS dodged the issue because a decision either way, will cause civil unrest, especially if it ruled against the gun nuts.

  7. #7
    Guru
    1750Texan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Southcental Texas
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,569

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Chaddelamancha View Post
    Just doing some quick research and ran across this: McDonald v. Chicago - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The synopsis is It seems pretty obvious to me that NJ requiring a special reason to carry a gun infringes on the second amendment.
    McDonald v. Chicago ruling was an extention of Heller. Heller allowed weapons for self-protection in the home...in the DC. [McD v Chi] extended that right to the states.

    No court has ruled yet if use extends outside the home... conceal /open carry.


  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Winchester View Post
    I personally would like to see a lawsuit challenging the need for a CCW permit in the first place.
    There is little doubt that requiring a permit is a violation of the second amendment.

  9. #9
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:12 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,336

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    'Ya know, I am kind of in the middle regarding this issue. I do feel that background checks should be necessary so that criminals and crazy people cannot legally purchase a gun. However, once passing a background check, I very strongly feel that carrying a gun is a constitutional right, per the second amendment. I believe the members of the Supreme Court are being cowards in avoiding this issue. And since this is the Roberts court, I am somewhat surprised, not to mention deeply disappointed.

    Discussion?

    Article is here.
    I also think that it is somewhat cowardly. On the other hand, it is not quite a non-decision. They let the decision stand.

  10. #10
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,601

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paxaeon View Post
    `
    In my humble opinion; SCOTUS dodged the issue because a decision either way, will cause civil unrest, especially if it ruled against the gun nuts.
    That is nonsense because that is precisely what the SCOTUS did - they said **** the constitution we decline to enforce it.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

Page 1 of 20 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •