8th Circuit says 2nd is Individual Right!!!!!

B

bookkie

New member
Even though the conviction was upheld.... the judges state that the 2nd is an individual right, but that right can be taken away for convicted felons.

For a better read see... http://www.saf.org/pub/rkba/news/8thCircuitDecisions.htm

Well we now have two districts ruling that the 2nd is an individual right. This will almost make it certain that the SC will have to hear a case. The've got way to much confusion between their Courts....

Will all of the legal scholarship that has been produced I can see good things a changin' in our court system.



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!
 
Hopeful; but also remember that the Supreme Court can create law out of whole cloth, as witness Roe vs. Wade. In these times, ideology can trump legal precedent and solid logic.

------------------
 
It's pretty damn pathetic that we have to rely on some politically appointed hack of a judge to tell us what Rights we have under the BILL OF RIGHTS. We as gun owners are only surviving at best, it's just a matter of time until we will legally be criminals for just owning guns. No! This doesn't mean I'm giving up and I'll continue to try and get the word out to people like I have for the last twelve years. Yeah, I know more states have passed concealed carry, but how many states, including feds have actually got rid of laws that are already on the books, semi auto bans, handgun bans, hicap bans, places where you can't carry, etc.? Even George Bush said he would accept a ban on anything more than ten rounds. Even in my state thanks to one county in particular a measure to have background checks(who knows what's in the fine print) at gun shows have managed for the SECOND TIME THIS YEAR to get enough signatures to make the November ballot. This time it's officially on the ballot. It will pass just like the damn anti hunting measure will. Too many damn people(especially urban critters) are so damn ignorant and lazy it's gotten to the point I think it's hopeless. Very negative attitude I know, but can any of you show me where I'm wrong? ALL WE ARE DOING IS SURVIVING AT THIS PRESENT TIME!!!

------------------
"Gun Control is Only to Protect Those in Power"
 
Exactly, the people of this country should not need permission. It is our right, and if that doesn't get through to Washington eventually steeper measures may be called for. That's exactly why the second was written in the first place. Of course noone has an excuse to step across that line without exhausting every other route. Still, if they try to totally outlaw guns it will mean violence, well beyond the levels we would see with no gun laws whatsoever. These gun grabbers are further driving a wedge between the people and their government, and too many of the people fall for it. The government is the people, as long as they participate. If you sit quietly and do nothing you will get trampled. As Plato said, "Only the dead have seen the end of war", and this holds true in politics too. We gun owners will be fighting gun grabbers till the end of time. I hope sincerely that you involve your children and your friends in this issue as much as possible, because they will be facing this stuff down the road as well. Unlike us, gun grabbers don't have enough rational braincells to plan ahead for the next generation of gun grabbers. They have to relearn the art of FUD every generation, but we can pass on a great deal of the logic we carry now to fight such things.

------------------
I twist the facts until they tell the truth.

The Bill of Rights is a document of brilliance, a document of wisdom, and it is the ultimate law, spoken or not, for the very concept of a society that holds liberty above the desire for ever greater power.
 
walangkatapat, I agree with you, but until such time as the SC rules as has the 9th circuit and the California SC, we still have some legal means to change things.... The bill of rights including the 2nd are natural rights, those which a majority can not deny to the minority. If gun owners are indeed a minority now... then and it appears likely, that we no longer can change things through the electorial process. This leaves one legal avenue left to us... the courts.... If the courts fail then there is no recorse left, but in the natural right of self defense. Lets just hope that the courts will eventually see the light.



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!
 
Walangkapat and Dangus, try to take some solace in the fact that we're not looking for them to tell US, or we'd never have started fighting in the first place. We're just looking for them to slap the cuffs on a government that has seen fit to deny the right we already know we have. And things are actually looking up.

That's as cheerful as I can make it; take it or leave it.
 
Here are a few of the key quotes from United States v. Hutzell (8th Cir. July 5, 2000), First from the majority opinion:

Although an individual's right to bear arms is constitutionally protected, see United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, 178-79 (1939), the possession of a gun, especially by anyone who has been convicted of a violent crime, is nevertheless a highly regulated activity, and everyone knows it. Page 4.

While this quote indicates that the right of firearm ownership is subject to many current regulations, the right remains individual and therefore these controls must have limits when dealing with non-criminal individuals. This case also cites United States v. Miller as protecting this individual right (in clear opposition to both the Feds and Handgun Control's slant of this case!). These are exactly the rulings Judge Sam Cummings made in U.S. v. Emerson.

There must be a limit to government regulation on lawful firearm possession. This statute exceeds that limit, and therefore it is unconstitutional." U.S. v. Emerson, 46 F.Supp.2d 598 (N.D.Tex. 1999).

Its too bad these or other judges didnt voice these thoughts in the 1950's or earlier, when there was not so much societal hysteria about guns, as there is now. Hopefully which ever court in the future makes the big decision it won't be influenced by the liberal freaks of this country and they will judge it solely on it's intent reguardless of the consequences. I know it's probably just pie in the sky. But wishfull thinking.



[This message has been edited by oberkommando (edited July 29, 2000).]
 
>the possession of a gun, especially by anyone who has been convicted of a violent crime, is nevertheless a highly regulated activity, and everyone knows it. Page 4.
____________________________________________

Requesting an informed legal opinion:

How much is this like saying, "murder is wrong, nevertheless people frequently kill each other and everyone knows it."

Does the fact that a wrong is common and well known make it right?

Bentley
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top