US Supreme court overturns DC gun ban. John McCain declares gun ownership "sacred"

[editor]

The Supreme Court in the US has overturned the Washington DC handgun ban with prize fuckwit John McCain saying, "Today's ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right - sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly."

How fucked up?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7476644.stm

 

[zoltan]

The Roberts court has a well Right wing / Con bias and its typical of their stance for the past few years - dont expect a great deal of change unless the democrats get in and a few codgers on the court pop their clogs soon - even then, I dont think Atm the US is ripe for more liberalism like wot we had in the Warren Court back in the day

 

[poului]

rfgjk6ryf

McCain pandering to the hard-right again. He's got an election to win, after all.

 

[likesfish]

The gun ban is pretty fucking stupid if you think about in a country awash with guns.
criminal can go out of the city limits cannon up with what ever the fuck he likes because he's breaking the law.
home owner or law abiding peep allowed nothing more than harsh language for self defence
your never going to get rid of guns in the states theres too many and often good reasons to own one if you leave in the wilds theres creatures that do eat people

 

[catrina]

I'm all for banning guns, but the Court had no other choice in this case. The route to banning guns has to be through an ammendment to the Constitution itself, not through the Courts.

Unfortunately, this is unlikely to ever happen.

As the 300+ year old law stands, citizens of the US have a right to bear arms. The Court interprets this writing, and it's pretty darn clear.

I believe Scalia even admitted support for measures to control gun violence in the US, despite his ruling.

 

[dilute micro]

The Supreme Court in the US has overturned the Washington DC handgun ban with prize fuckwit John McCain saying, "Today's ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right - sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly."

How fucked up?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7476644.stm

In the lighter definition of the word sacred I don't see anything wrong with what he said. I wouldn't talk of gun ownership as a religion, but as untouchable by the supreme court or other governments then yes.

 

[dilute micro]

McCain pandering to the hard-right again. He's got an election to win, after all.

Why would he be only pandering with this? The gun issue has been around since before he was born. Certainly he has a position and has had it before being a candidate.

 

[camouflage]

Apparently Canada is equally awash with guns but because it's a civilised country people aren't getting shot-up all the time. The problem in the US is that it's not really civilised and it's also a culture ruled and motivated and controlled by fear. That's what that fat man with the glasses said anyway. Sounded convincing to me.

 

[frogwoman]

The Supreme Court in the US has overturned the Washington DC handgun ban with prize fuckwit John McCain saying, "Today's ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right - sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly."

How fucked up?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7476644.stm

Great, and the school shooters, murderers and criminals have of course maligned this sacred right. Let's see them be sent to jail for blasphemy!

 

[Barking_Mad]

you'd have thought with all those guns one of them would have shot the president by now.

 

[frogwoman]

you'd have thought with all those guns one of them would have shot the president by now.

Careful.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Careful.

The NSA hasn't been around my place yet over this thread:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=255070

They probably want to shoot him themselves at this point.

 

[untethered]

I'm all for banning guns, but the Court had no other choice in this case. The route to banning guns has to be through an ammendment to the Constitution itself, not through the Courts.

Unfortunately, this is unlikely to ever happen.

Very true. There should be more emphasis on winning the arguments and changing the constitution rather than trying to have it interpreted in a beneficial way.

As the 300+ year old law stands, citizens of the US have a right to bear arms. The Court interprets this writing, and it's pretty darn clear.

Actually it isn't, which is why it keeps coming back to the court. But I'll follow my own advice and leave the legal points aside to concentrate on the political factors. The constitution is supposed to be a shield, not a straitjacket. It's important but not "sacred" -- just another set of rules made by another set of people.

 

[Idaho]

If those americans want to have guns, then who am I to get in their way. As long as we don't start dishing them out over here then - meh.

 

[Detroit City]

The Supreme Court in the US has overturned the Washington DC handgun ban with prize fuckwit John McCain saying, "Today's ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right - sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly."

How fucked up?

its about as fucked up as all the "sacred" cows running around india whilst many people starve

 

[frogwoman]

Our gun laws are wayyyyyyy too harsh IMO, but no way would I want to see it become like America here in regards to guns.

 

[catrina]

Very true. There should be more emphasis on winning the arguments and changing the constitution rather than trying to have it interpreted in a beneficial way.



Actually it isn't, which is why it keeps coming back to the court. But I'll follow my own advice and leave the legal points aside to concentrate on the political factors. The constitution is supposed to be a shield, not a straitjacket. It's important but not "sacred" -- just another set of rules made by another set of people.

I don't think the right to bear arms is sacred. The FF wrote the constitution to be interpretable and malleable over time. The Supreme Court can interpret when things are open to interpretation, but I still would argue that this one in particular isn't. They hadn't foreseen how large and divided America would actually grow when they wrote the thing, so the bar they have set for a constitutional ammendment seems insurmountable in modern times. Which is why they keep trying to get a precedent for gun law set by the Court.

One thing is for certain. The same men who were afraid to allow the commoners nominate presidential candidates and the senate (originally senators were appointed by members of the House, and the Electoral College was a protection against the commoner) certainly didn't foresee the second ammendment enabling every commoner to carry a hand weapon.

However, the misconstruement of the right to overthrow your government as the right to maintain a personal armament is now so ingrained in some parts of America's psyche that it will take a 50 year long grass roots assault to fix.

 

[dilute micro]

The FF wrote the constitution to be interpretable and malleable over time.

Uh no. That's how we're taught it to be. The vagueness of the Federal constitution was so that it would work in conjunction with state constitutions. On top of that the proceedings from the congress were destroyed (one of the major goofs of the FF) which has left the door wide open for "interpretation" rather than a concise understanding of what they intended.

 

[agricola]

I don't think the right to bear arms is sacred. The FF wrote the constitution to be interpretable and malleable over time. The Supreme Court can interpret when things are open to interpretation, but I still would argue that this one in particular isn't. They hadn't foreseen how large and divided America would actually grow when they wrote the thing, so the bar they have set for a constitutional ammendment seems insurmountable in modern times. Which is why they keep trying to get a precedent for gun law set by the Court.

One thing is for certain. The same men who were afraid to allow the commoners nominate presidential candidates and the senate (originally senators were appointed by members of the House, and the Electoral College was a protection against the commoner) certainly didn't foresee the second ammendment enabling every commoner to carry a hand weapon.

However, the misconstruement of the right to overthrow your government as the right to maintain a personal armament is now so ingrained in some parts of America's psyche that it will take a 50 year long grass roots assault to fix.

"Grass roots assault"?

 

[catrina]

I was trying to be funny. How do you peacefully take on a movement with such violent inclinations? Any ideas?

 

[max_freakout]

someone wıll need a gun to assassınate Obama

 

[agricola]

I was trying to be funny. How do you peacefully take on a movement with such violent inclinations? Any ideas?

I think the best way to do this would be to leave them alone, and pick an actual problem and try and fix it.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

I thought that the idea of that amendment was to provide a constitutional basis for and right to form as a militia though, in which case they'd surely need at least mortars, RPGs and anti-air?

 

[Bloody_ICE]

Dumb americans, while their country falls apart in infrastructure and social problems. More levees breaking, states underwater, school kids on murder sprees, health care so bad in international tables the usa doesn't even make the top 20. The americans worry about who should own a shotgun. Bloody savages.

 

[Dravinian]

Dumb americans, while their country falls apart in infrastructure and social problems. More levees breaking, states underwater, school kids on murder sprees, health care so bad in international tables the usa doesn't even make the top 20. The americans worry about who should own a shotgun. Bloody savages.

Dumb Britons, while our county falls apart in infrastructure, water companies lying about leaks, housing market crashing round our ears, failing education. More worries about buildings on Flood Plains, Tewkesbury under water again, Child Poverty and Fuel poverty still here. School Kids on Murder sprees, 60 years of an NHS that is about to collapse.

The British worry about whether they should have a referendum on Europe.

Bloody savages.

-

So becuase our court recently decided a case about whether the Government should hold a referendum, we are all savages because there are bigger problems?

 

[Bloody_ICE]

Doesn't worry me, wimbledon is on. btw i like europe, nice people. More sane than the yanks. Better tennis players as well.

 

[Marsh]

I am in favour of the right of people to bear arms and I oppose measures taken in by any government in any country to disarm people. Not because I have any respect for the US constitution as such (I am not an American and the US constitution has many flaws in it), but because I oppose the monopoly the state has on weapons/firepower and violence.

The biggest killers in human history have been states, no other entity or individual outside of the state has ever come as close to killing as many humans as have states.

There are other countries that have the right to bear arms that do not have the problems that the USA has with guns. It does have more to do with culture and the nature of US society than gun ownership in and of itself.

 

[Squatticus]

^^
Funnily enough that's exactly what I was going to say.

 

[Squatticus]

By the way Marsh, welcome!

 

[Bob_the_lost]

The biggest killers in human history have been states, no other entity or individual outside of the state has ever come as close to killing as many humans as have states.

Religion!