Finally!

A just decision by the Supreme Court.

The right to keep and bear arms, is an individual right, without regard to any type of membership in any militia.

What say you gun grabbers now?

Amen :)

Now if they would just loosen the concealed carry laws things would be better yet ;)

No response from anyone opposed to this decision huh?

Your silence is deafening, I guess everyone agrees that this was a monumental decision, and that it was decided correctly.

It was about time this issue was finally settled.

I only did start reading the decision (it is 150+pages so it will take time . I did read all of the capital punishment case yesterday so my mind is kind of SCOTUSed out ). On the surface it appears that Scalia did leave wiggle room for the regulation of guns so the 2nd Amendment is not quite absolute. DC can't ban guns in the home . But they can make licensing them a nightmare.

However this is victory . The good people of Washington DC do not have to be compelled into victim status. Rick is right that conceal and carry laws need to be loosened .

Obviously, the folks who want our entire society disarmed, will never stop trying to find a way to do so.

Just the fact that they decided that this was an individual right, has put a huge wrench in the gun grabbers fan.

You are right, they will continue, in fact, they are already trying to work on specific attacks on ammunition, I'm sure that these type back door efforts will increase now that this decision has been made.

Yes, I am only saddened they did not get more specific at what limits can be put.

What this ruling finally did was put to rest this phony argument that the 2nd is not for individuals but to arm "well regulated militias".

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. " James Madison

Progun

I think your name scared the gun grabbers away. I totally agree with the decision that we have the right to have our guns to defend our homes... now we need the right to defend ourselves when we are not home..

Work on that with them will you? I spend a lot of time in remote mountain ranges... would like to have my weapon in my ATV (without being arrested for doing so if caught).

Shirley

I am fairly active in the support of our second amendment rights.

As to concealed carry, there is much to be done in that regard as well.

I don't understand the mentality that can't comprehend that it is a good thing, for the criminal to have to worry about his victim being armed, and not just the other way around.

Wouldn't you be allowed to have your firearm with you in those mountain regions just as long as you don't have it concealed?

Unless it is designated as a State or Federal Park that is.

You know, were it not for the two Justices appointed by George Bush, we would no longer have any second amendment rights?

"Wiping the sweat off my forehead" That was a very close call, was it not?

Gee, I wonder what type of Justices Obama might appoint should he be elected?

I don't know about Obama, I really don't like anyone running for president at all. Can I vote none of the above on my vote?

I am in National Forest land and no I cannot carry a gun there , I might be mistaken for Claude Dallas (who by the way got a bad deal in my books).

I do, however, carry a small hand axe with a bungie within hand reach. I carry it in case I need to clear limbs out of the way of my ATV as a safety measure and I have a tire Iron in case I need to change my tire if it goes flat, also a safety measure and a small fire extinguisher in case I spot a fire.

Shirley

Yeah, National Forest, no guns there, for the law abiding that is.

I'm sure that any criminal, or, anyone with criminal intent, checks their firearms with the Park Ranger just as they arrive there, right?

Be Safe!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by westnlas

I really don't see how this affects me at all. I don't own a single registered firearm. I also make ammunition purchases in cash at locations and quantities that ID's aren't necessary. Everyone should have the capability to load their own ammunition too, just in case.

---

You don't see how this effected you?

My friend, this effected every citizen in this Great Nation!

Had this decision gone the other way, as it would have, without the Justices appointed by Bush, we would no longer have a second amendment right to possess firearms at all.

How could this decision NOT effect you, and everyone else in America?

Perhaps you were not aware that the Libs/Dems wanted to eliminate the Second Amendment from our Constitution COMPLETELY?

And if that failed, wanted at the very least, to get a ruling that it only applied to members of a militia, and not to every individual law abiding citizen in the USA.

This was a HUGE decision, with long term benefits to EVERY citizen.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_Xn_O-mM2sFk/...olddead-fp.jpg

Page 61 of the decision :

Quote:

---

It is enough to note, as we have observed, that the American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon. There are many reasons that a citizen may prefer a handgun for home defense: It is easier to store in a location that is readily accessible in an emergency; It cannot easily be redirected or wrestled away by an attacker; it is easier to use for those without the upperbody strength to lift and aim a long gun; it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police. Whatever the reason, handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home, and a complete prohibition of their use is invalid.

---

It's sad that it had to be fought out in court in the first place. It's sad that there are pricks on this planet that want to control other people lives and limit their rights. I don't celebrate the outcome of the case. Either way, I'm keeping my guns whether they like it or not.

Hello again, Prog:

OMG, THAT'S what Progunr means?? If'in I knew that, I'd be calling you gundude. Now, we're going to have to get reintroduced.

Progundude, I'm excon, a supporter of our great Constitution. That includes ALL the Amendments - even the ones you don't like. Yes, they finally DID get it right.

I really never could figure out what prog meant anyway. I'm not good at scrabble.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Prog:

OMG, THAT'S what Progunr means??? If'in I knew that, I'd be calling you gundude. Now, we're gonna have to get reintroduced.

Progundude, I'm excon, a supporter of our great Constitution. That includes ALL the Amendments - even the ones you don't like. Yes, they finally DID get it right.

I really never could figure out what prog meant anyway. I'm not good at scrabble.

excon

---

I really don't have any issues with any of the amendments, so we are on the same page in that regard.

Yeah, it is the spelling error that throws folks off, it is left over from an old personal license plate, that was limited to only 7 letters.

Have to admit, I was holding my breath as the decision was being read.

You know if everyone hada gun, criminals would know that if they tried to shoot they'd get shot, thus lowering crime! No duh. Now I do think we should have background checks, so we make sure we don't hand out a gun to someone criminally insane, or someone who has a record. But yeah we should be allowed to have guns, I mean our police force isn't always going to be there before some lunitic kills someone, I mean if we had guns we could stop him. All right all right there, finally I have told the world how I feel about guns. Whew I feel better.

oh wow I just thought progunr was some random letters strung together, I had noideait meant pro gun,OK now I feel silly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by progunr

Obviously, the folks who want our entire society disarmed, will never stop trying to find a way to do so.

---

While I do not deny that there are extreme elements in our society that want everyone "disarmed", they are no worse or prevalent then the opposite extreme that wants a wild west scenario with everyone totin' iron.

I believe that most people fall into the middle. I am not a gun owner, nor would I ever consider owning one. But I do believe that law abiding citizens should have the right to own firearms for protection or sport if they choose to. Without reading the full decision, my belief is that the intent of the court was to affirm an individual's right own a weapon for protection of their property. But that doesn't mean that such possession can't be subject to licensing and registration. Nor does the decision allow people to walk around armed.

The real importance of the decision was that it affirmed the individual right and removed qualification of a militia.

There appears to be a paranoia on the part of many gun enthusiasts that the gun control advocates want to take their guns away completely. This paranoia causes them to fight any reasonable attempts to regulate gun ownership. The result is incidents like Va Tech.

It is my belief that if the gun lobby got behind REASONABLE attempts to prevent guns from getting into the hands of people like the Va Tech shooter, then they would be helping people who want guns get them and they would be forestalling more onerous attempts at gun control.

Sorry but the argument that a gun totin populace would put the fear into criminals is totally ridiculous. Carrying a gun gives the carrier a false sense of security and bravado be they law abiding citizen or criminal. The real result of the wild west syndrome would be the death or injury of loads of innocent people who would get caught in the crossfire.