This could be good or bad

[TexasR.N.]

D.C.'s Gun Ban Gets Day in Court

This could be good or bad depending on how the Supreme Court rules. If they rule in favor of only a well armed militia can we form a PowerStroke.Org militia?
On a serious note, if they came down on the side of the militia argument, what kind of can of worms would that open? Final decision comes in June.

A) I am personally not giving up my guns. I believe in the phrase "Politicians prefer unarmed peasants". And there aren't a handful of them I trust.

B) How will they decide who gets to form a militia? Do they (Supreme Court) consider the National Guard a militia? If so, will the Guard be considered independent of Federal control vs. now how the Guard can be activated (probably wrong terminology) at a Federal level. Reverting back to state control only?

C) How would the gun owning population in general react?

D) Would this cause a shift in the presidential race as the obvious necessity for more constitutionalist judges?

E) I think I know how Obama / Hillary would react. The more important question is what stance would McCain take?

F) Will gun purchases increase before the decision is handed down?

What are y'alls opinion of the potential impact of a Supreme Court decision going against private gun ownership?
Craig

[Snowman66]

Doesn't a citizen militia mean just that, citizens

[sldghamr]

first off, the Constitution starts out with: "We the People"...... (in big letters)

secondly, the second ammendment has in it: "The right of the "people" to bear arms shall not be infringed." or something to that effect.

i dont think there is much room for interpretation. the ruling came out when the Founding Fathers wrote our Constitution/Bill of Rights.

[TexasR.N.]

I agree with what both of y'all said. But here's the problem, we are the average citizens discussing this. Sometimes something happens to the rationale and judgment judges use. I personally don't see how they (Supreme Court) can strike gun ownership down. However, I cannot see Ruth Bader-Ginsburg saying "Oh yeah, you can have all of the guns you want." She was the former in house counsel for the ACLU. I realize this is just one justice, but remember it doesn't have to be a unanimous decision, 5-4 and that's it.
Craig

[Dirk]

Originally Posted by HappeetxnR.N.

I agree with what both of y'all said. But here's the problem, we are the average citizens discussing this. Sometimes something happens to the rationale and judgment judges use. I personally don't see how they (Supreme Court) can strike gun ownership down. However, I cannot see Ruth Bader-Ginsburg saying "Oh yeah, you can have all of the guns you want." She was the former in house counsel for the ACLU. I realize this is just one justice, but remember it doesn't have to be a unanimous decision, 5-4 and that's it.
Craig

I believe you are wrong. The problem is we are NOT the average citizens. The average citizen now is nothing more than a sheep in the flock.

Craig, you are well read and you ask questions. Think about this... all the people going on and on about Obama and Billary, do you think they are well read? The only questions they are asking is what their party wants them to ask.

[Snowman66]

To insure a free state,.... from all enemys, foreign and domistic.

[TexasR.N.]

Just bumping this back up as I find it interesting.
Craig

[kingchip]

As I understand it, the Supreme Court have granted the Solicitor General 15 minutes. Although the case was filed by a security guard that is allowed a firearm at work, but not at home, it is being pushed by Dick Cheney and Kay Bailey Hutchenson, among others. I'm thinking that the decision will be landmark, either way. I hope the 2nd amendment is upheld.

[Tikal]

If they wanna take my guns, they'll hafta come and get 'em theirselves

[!!!PainTrain!!!]

Originally Posted by Tikal

If they wanna take my guns, they'll hafta come and get 'em theirselves

From my cold dead hands. The day that they ban guns and try to take mine away is the day I go down in a hail of gun fire.