New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Court: 2nd Amendment trumps local gun limits
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

Court: 2nd Amendment trumps local gun limits

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/23/2009 at 10:14
Chris Farris View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
swfa.com

Joined: October/01/2003
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 7765

 Wednesday, April 22, 2009


WEAPONS OF CHOICE
WorldNetDaily

Court: 2nd Amendment trumps local gun limits
Described as 'protection against government degenerating into tyranny'

Posted: April 22, 2009
11:50 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh


WorldNetDaily


The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California has ruled that the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms is "deeply rooted in this nation's history and tradition" and long has been regarded as the "true palladium of liberty," so it therefore must be applied against state and local government weapon restrictions as well as federal gun limits.

The ruling came in a decade-old dispute over a private operation's request to hold a gun show at a county fairground, even though the county prohibited gun possession at its facilities.

The new ruling from the usually liberal 9th Circuit said Alameda County in California was allowed to ban guns at its facilities, but in general the 2nd Amendment provision for Americans to keep and bear arms applies not to just federal gun limits but local rules as well.

"This could be big, folks," wrote Kurt Hofmann at the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner.

(Story continues below)

"In Nordyke v. King … we may very well be seeing the beginning of the end of that very unsatisfactory set of circumstances, wherein state and local governments need not so much as pay lip service to the 2nd Amendment," he continued. "In the 9th Circuit, in fact, that end has indeed arrived.

"This development is very significant, because the 9th is the largest, and thus one of the most important, federal circuit courts. It is also considered the most 'liberal,' and thus perhaps the most resistant to protecting the right to keep and bear arms," he continued.

Hofmann cited a concurring opinion by Judge Ronald M. Gould, who wrote that nothing less than the security of the nation – a defense against both external and internal threats – rests on the provision.

"The right to bear arms is a bulwark against external invasion. We should not be overconfident that oceans on our east and west coasts alone can preserve security," Gould wrote. "We recently saw in the case of the terrorist attack on Mumbai that terrorists may enter a country covertly by ocean routes, landing in small craft and then assembling to wreak havoc. That we have a lawfully armed populace adds a measure of security for all of us and makes it less likely that a band of terrorists could make headway in an attack on any community before more professional forces arrived. Second, the right to bear arms is a protection against the possibility that even our own government could degenerate into tyranny, and though this may seem unlikely, this possibility should be guarded against with individual diligence."

The court opinion this week said, "We therefore conclude that the right to keep and bear arms is 'deeply rooted in this nation's history and tradition.'

"Colonial revolutionaries, the Founders, and a host of commentators and lawmakers living during the first one hundred years of the Republic all insisted on the fundamental nature of the right. It has long been regarded as the 'true palladium of liberty.' Colonists relied on it to assert and to win their independence, and the victorious Union sought to prevent a recalcitrant South from abridging it less than a century later," the court continued.

"The crucial role this deeply rooted right has played in our birth and history compels us to recognize that it is indeed fundamental, that it is necessary to the Anglo-American conception of ordered liberty that we have inherited. We are therefore persuaded that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment and applies it against the states and local governments," the opinion said.

The court previously had ruled exactly the opposite way, but it said the U.S. Supreme Court's Heller decision, which confirmed that the 2nd Amendment right is personal as well as collective, prompted the reversal.

At Poligazette, a commentator noted it is a major victory for the pro-gun position.

And another Gun Rights Examiner writer, D

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/23/2009 at 10:55
cyborg View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
God of Wind

Joined: August/24/2007
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 12082
WOW   Man I hope it goes the right way. Can you believe the normally liberal leaning would rule that way?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/23/2009 at 15:20
BeltFed View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: February/12/2008
Location: Ky
Status: Offline
Points: 16067
I'm shocked!
Bet you don't hear this on the nightly news though.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/23/2009 at 17:36
3_tens View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2007
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7180
This judge needs to rule over the rights of land owners on the boarders to protect the boarders against invaders. I would be willing to fill out a U.S. boarder hunting permit. This would scare the pants off the drug runners and others.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/23/2009 at 18:07
silver View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: November/04/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2291
What is real interesting is this is the court that "everybody" had expected to rule against the 2nd Amendment.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/23/2009 at 21:37
helo18 View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: December/02/2006
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 5429
Originally posted by 3_tens 3_tens wrote:

This judge needs to rule over the rights of land owners on the boarders to protect the boarders against invaders. I would be willing to fill out a U.S. boarder hunting permit. This would scare the pants off the drug runners and others.


I wouldn't let the 9th Circuit rule on too many things.  They are one of the most liberal in the country.  They only reversed that after the Heller case.  If that case had not happened, this decision would never have been reversed.  The 9th Circuit (which Montana falls under) scares me.
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Court: 2nd Amendment trumps local gun limits"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Ted Nugent on 2nd Amendment RifleDude Firearms 9
trump card? mgraham Rifle Scopes 12
Consulting w/ local SWAT / Gang Unit 338LAPUASLAP Tactical Scopes 35
Bushnell Limited Edition dkevinbarnes Rifle Scopes 15
Help me decide, limited budget DeerHuntr Rifle Scopes 20
Rem 700 CDL SF Limited Edition Tip69 Firearms 32
Age limit to hunt ???? Chris Farris General Hunting 18 5/31/2007 9:05:19 AM
Local Customers Safari Pics. Chris Farris General Hunting 1 11/12/2007 5:25:52 AM
MOA click limit Inukshuk Tactical Scopes 1 7/18/2005 5:39:59 PM
**Limited Edition* ELCAN SpecterDRs in FDE Brady Tactical Scopes 12


This page was generated in 0.438 seconds.