Taking The Second Amendment To Court

The Supreme Court Prepares To Examine DC's Right To Ban Handguns In The Context Of The Constitution

(CBS)  For the first time in 70 years, the Supreme Court will examine the right to bear arms, centering on a Washington, DC ban on handguns. But DC is not alone. Dozens of other jurisdictions also have restrictions on handguns - including the city of Chicago.

CBS Weekend News anchor Thalia Assuras reports that the Windy City has been shocked by a recent jump in gun violence - a ten year old shot in the head; a pregnant mother gunned down on Halloween; a college student killed in front of his dorm - all committed with handguns in a city that bans them.

"Last year we had 34 high school students in Chicago killed because of gun violence," community activist Reverend Michael Pfleger tells Assuras, "that is a classroom. That is bigger than a classroom."

Reverend Pfleger has been working to end gun violence for 30 years, funding billboards and pressuring law makers to pass stricter rules. He admits the handgun ban in Chicago has not eliminated gun deaths, but without it he says, "I think you would see an already bad problem become worse."

Since 1982, Assuras reports, Chicago has labeled handguns as items which cannot be registered. At least twelve other nearby suburbs have similar policies. The only other major city to have such a wide-ranging ban is Washington, D.C., although municipalities like New York do limit ownership through a permit system.

If the Supreme Court rules against the D.C. ban, all of those other policies may have to be thrown out as well. The implications of that have many anti-gun advocates worried.

Josh Horowitz, the director of the Coalition Against Gun Violence, tells CBS, "It's really unpredictable right now. We're going to write the best briefs we can and hope for the best outcome we can, but its really an unknown at this point."

Critics of the bans argue that they infringe on individuals rights, are ineffective at preventing violence and are unnecessary because of existing laws aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.

They don't comply with handgun bans or with all the other gun laws, says NRA executive vice-president, Wayne LaPierre. "That is why they are called criminals. The thing that works is, confront them directly and take them off the street - prosecute them 100 percent of the time."

The National Rifle Association is concerned because a Supreme Court decision in Washington's favor will strike at the heart of its position but, says LaPierre, that is an outcome that his organization would challenge.

"Regardless what happens, the NRA, we're going to defend this freedom. The American public will not see the ruling political class take away their basic freedom."

[jbaker314]

guysdigdirt,

I agree. Was it not Rosie O''Donnell I saw recently who objects to people having guns, but has her own armed guards?

There are many words that can be used in such cases, but I think that "hippocrit" should suffice.

[guysdigdirt]

jbaker,
If you look at my original post, I said people will use any form af death they can when they decide on suicide. In Japan it is often the trains used, because it is easy to do so. In other countries it is a long car ride that never leaves the garage.

If a gun is available, it is sometimes used for suicide, if it is on, other means will be found.

It all goes back to the same thing, it is not the gun that kills, it is the person using the gun. If guns are not available then some other weapon will be used.

If you make guns illegal for the regual person, you leave them without protection from those who will use illegal guns or other weapons to criminalize the regular people.

I would bet that those in the govt. and entertainment industry, who are pushing for gun control have have their own plan to have their body guards armed. That seems fair doesn''t it, they can be protected but we cannot.

[jbaker314]

guysdigdirt,

I can''t provide worldwide numbers at this time.

I was simply providing statistics for the United States.

[guysdigdirt]

jbaker, I too can find stars to back my point, but I will ask you to. Give me the same stats from a legit source, for world wide suicides.

Thgdriver, as she should sir.

[jbaker314]

guysdigdirt,

For the year 2004, there were 29,569 firearm-related deaths. Of these, 16,750 were suicides.

There were an additional 15,689 suicides that did not involve the use of firearms.

The statistics, provided at (http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html) show that firearms are the preferred method of suicide in this country, and that nearly 57% of all firearm-related deaths are suicides.

[thgdriver]

guysdigdirt

I am serious, she has her own, S&W 5 shot, 38 snub nose stainless steel special. Has a permit to carry it too.

[thgdriver]

Now what does she do, you turned in your guns.


Posted by guysdigdirt

I turned in my guns, she gets to keep hers. She never agrees to anything I say or do. LOL.

[guysdigdirt]

The govenments of countries like Syria, China and Venezuala are working with the likes of George Sorros through the United Nations to take your guns. Many Americans who are uneducated to the truth will think that is a good thing. It is not.

If the United Nations gets to start telling US Citizens what part of the Constitution we cannot keep then we are not the US of A anymore.

Look into it, get educated. Stand up for your rights.

[guysdigdirt]

I do not support the NRA in any shape or form but I do support the right to carry arms for self protection paticularly in todays sick world.

Any who would come my way are subject to retribution and death should they attempt to harm me or my family

Posted by hissteps4u

If you want to continue to keep your weapons legally, maybe you should find an organization to help you, like the NRA. If you think them bad, find another, but get educated and then stand tall in defence of your right to own a gun.

[guysdigdirt]

1) You say "Most deaths are due to criminals who are legally prohibited from possessing firearms. How exactly are the NRA and legit gun owners such as you trying to affect this? 2) I agree that a large number of gun deaths are suicides. I feel that I would be more likely to choose a gun compared to using other methods such as sharp instruments or poisons.
Posted by USBrit

Let me see if I can put in my humble opinion on these questions.
1-
Why is it the responsibility of the legal gun owners, or the NRA''s, in to enforce the law? Is it the responsibility of the legal users of prescription drugs to stop the illegal use of drugs? Or the responsibility of the doctors?

But to answer your questions. The NRA, among many others things, trains thousands of police officers to better be able to use their weapons, so they might better survive an encounter with an armed criminal.

We legal gun owners, find ourselves protecting ourselves, and in some cases other, from those who would use a gun illegally, to defend our rights and sometimes lives.

Let me ask you this question...
If you were a criminal, armed or not, would you rather attack someone who is armed or not armed? If you have a brain you will agree on that merit alone, the mere existence of lawful gun owners possibly, and likely probably, deters some criminal activity aided by an illegal gun.

2-
Statistically, a very small percentage of the people in the world that commit suicide use a gun.

[guysdigdirt]

---"When our government or whoever, can prove to me, all the bad guys have been disarmed I will be the first to either destroy my own or donate them to a museum.
Posted by thgdriver

Well put.

However, if your wife is home alone, and at 1 a.m. she hears a noise and upon investigating sees tyhe shadows of two large men entering your 8 year old daughter''s room. Now what does she do, you turned in your guns.

[guysdigdirt]

Do you think a foolish law like "one gun a month purchase" would make a difference? That law is being touted by the Mayor of Phila. and the governor of Pennsylvania. Duh!!! Criminals can''''t buy guns and when they try they are not prosecuted.

Posted by thgdriver

So what do you propose?

[guysdigdirt]

let''''s use OUR short moment in the sun to make sound decisions based on common sense and the most good for the most people.
Posted by bombadil4

Who gets to decide what makes common sense and is good for most people? You? Me?

[guysdigdirt]

I think the NRA can do a lot of good (can''''t believe I''''m saying that) if they get off the "Can''''t stop anyone getting a gun wagon" and more onto the "Some people shouldn''''t have a gun" wagon which is at least the vastly under-publicized portion of their constituency, but I won''''t hold my breath.
Posted by USBrit

If you look into what the NRA really does you might be suprised.

[thgdriver]

Gotta go. Nice chatting!

[thgdriver]

USBrit ----I don''t live in Philadelphia.

I know about the search laws and agree, I am certainly not for any kind of police state.

On the other hand. they set up road blocks for DUI drivers, all cars passing through are subject to being searched for open containers of Alcoholic beverages. I figure why not a illegal gun check?

Quite frankly though, I never thought the DUI check was legal either, but they do it all the time..

[usbrit-2009]

The criminals know the cops have guns and still don''''t give a rats aiss. What chance does an honest citizen have these days? - posted be thgdriver

I''ll have one more comment. On the bright side. Statistics show as I have said you are 200 times more likely to be killed with a gun in the US than the UK. (~ 150 times discounting suicides). Statistics also show that even with 300,000,000 guns in the US your cahnces of being shot with one is still only 400 : 1. ie for every 400 people you know 399 will not get shot. Sounds a bit better that way round doesn''t it?

[usbrit-2009]

I see DUI check points set up all over my state. Why not do the same thing for illegal guns? - posted by thgdriver -

I think reasonable cause search and seizure laws might have somthing to do with that. Now if the cop has reason to believe the stoppee is a terrorist, we know that law goes out the window!!

[usbrit-2009]

thgdriver - sorry to hear about your officers. Things here in Cinci are better but there''s still the who shot who wars on the news every night. My wife grew up in Philly; I lived in L.A. for 25 years (talk about who shot who!!). I was once brave (or dumb) enough to espouse my gun control beliefs in Georgia (not a good plan). Basically I have changed my mind about gun ownership. I still feel that it is a shame but I''ve come to the conclusion that it can be prudent under today''s conditions. I think the NRA can do a lot of good (can''t believe I''m saying that) if they get off the "Can''t stop anyone getting a gun wagon" and more onto the "Some people shouldn''t have a gun" wagon which is at least the vastly under-publicized portion of their constituency, but I won''t hold my breath.

[thgdriver]

I see DUI check points set up all over my state. Why not do the same thing for illegal guns?

The police are making a criminal out of some poor slob that took his wife out to dinner and a beer. Why not get the guns instead?

For the record--I do not drink any alcoholic beverages at any time..