Gunners762
06-26-2008, 07:00 PM
CHICAGO -- The U.S. Supreme Court (http://www.nbc5.com/topic/U.S.+Supreme+Court) ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting -- the justices' first definitive pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history. Now, the NRA is planning lawsuits to challenge similar laws, including Chicago (http://www.nbc5.com/topic/Chicago)'s.
The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia (http://www.nbc5.com/topic/Washington%2c+DC)'s 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.
The challenge to the ban on handguns in Washington, D.C., was the biggest case left on the court's docket. Under the D.C. law -- the strictest of its kind in the nation -- private ownership of handguns was banned, and rifles or shotguns had to be kept in homes disassembled or under a trigger lock.
The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.
Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.
The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.
In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."
He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."
Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.
The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.
The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.
Challenge To Chicago Gun Law In Works NBC5 reported that Chicago's gun laws could soon be affected by the high court's ruling.
Gun rights supporters hailed Thursday's Supreme Court decision. "I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association (http://www.nbc5.com/topic/National+Rifle+Association).
The NRA said it will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.
Mayor Richard M. Daley has been a longtime proponent of gun-control laws, saying they help reduce violent crime. At a news conference for the Chicago Flower & Garden Show, Daley spoke fervently for more than 10 minutes about the ruling, calling it incongruent with the Supreme Court's own security policies.
"It's amazing how the Supreme Court and Congress -- you can't carry a gun into the Supreme Court," Daley said. "You can't carry a gun in and around the Capitol building. You can't get into a capitol building without being searched. So why should our streets of our American cities be open to someone carrying a gun? ... Why can't you stand outside the Supreme Court with a gun and say, 'This is my Constitutional right?'"
When pressed by a reporter about a person's right to keep a gun in his home, Daley turned the question back on the reporter.
"Do you think your next-door neighbor should have an Oozie, an AK-47? Any type of gun? Do you really believe that? Good luck. But don't call the police if they're shooting an AK-47 in their back yard," he said. "This is a very frightening decision."
Daley said guns would not solve any problems in the country, but would result in higher taxes and insurance costs for Americans due to the need for more police officers and long-term health care for those who suffer serious gun injuries.
Chicago has seen a recent spate of gun violence affecting everyone from school children and teachers to the elderly. Marches and rallies have gathered hundreds of protesters who blame guns on the streets for the violent crime wave.
One such rally took place Wednesday night at 119th Street and Perry Avenue, where a 14-year-old was shot and killed over his bicycle. The boy's mother, along with city, state and religious leaders, turned out for the rally as the community struggles for solutions.
"Everybody is waking up, because when you see a group of people like this, that really lets you know that everyone is waking up and they want to see a change," said Herman Owens Jr., who attended the rally.
The Wednesday rally coincided with a gun buy-back program that gave those who turned in a gun a $100 Visa gift card.
The Chicago-area suburbs of Morton Grove, Oak Park, Wilmette and Evanston all have gun-control laws on the books and will likely become targets of NRA lawsuits.
The mother of a teenager shot to death while riding a Chicago bus last May is lashing out at the U.S. Supreme Court for striking down a ban on handguns.
Annette Nance-Holt said the decision to strike down the District of Columbia's ban illustrates how out of touch the justices are with the lives of regular people.
Nance-Holt said the justices live in safe neighborhoods where they don't have to worry about gun violence. She also said the decision shows society is more worried about guns than the children who are often innocent victims of gun violence.
Nance-Holt's 16-year-old son, Blair Holt, was killed and four others injured when someone opened fire on a city bus. Two teens have been charged with murder in connection with the slaying.
http://www.nbc5.com/news/16715323/detail.html?dl=mainclick
The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia (http://www.nbc5.com/topic/Washington%2c+DC)'s 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.
The challenge to the ban on handguns in Washington, D.C., was the biggest case left on the court's docket. Under the D.C. law -- the strictest of its kind in the nation -- private ownership of handguns was banned, and rifles or shotguns had to be kept in homes disassembled or under a trigger lock.
The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.
Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.
The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.
In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."
He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."
Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.
The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.
The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.
Challenge To Chicago Gun Law In Works NBC5 reported that Chicago's gun laws could soon be affected by the high court's ruling.
Gun rights supporters hailed Thursday's Supreme Court decision. "I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association (http://www.nbc5.com/topic/National+Rifle+Association).
The NRA said it will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.
Mayor Richard M. Daley has been a longtime proponent of gun-control laws, saying they help reduce violent crime. At a news conference for the Chicago Flower & Garden Show, Daley spoke fervently for more than 10 minutes about the ruling, calling it incongruent with the Supreme Court's own security policies.
"It's amazing how the Supreme Court and Congress -- you can't carry a gun into the Supreme Court," Daley said. "You can't carry a gun in and around the Capitol building. You can't get into a capitol building without being searched. So why should our streets of our American cities be open to someone carrying a gun? ... Why can't you stand outside the Supreme Court with a gun and say, 'This is my Constitutional right?'"
When pressed by a reporter about a person's right to keep a gun in his home, Daley turned the question back on the reporter.
"Do you think your next-door neighbor should have an Oozie, an AK-47? Any type of gun? Do you really believe that? Good luck. But don't call the police if they're shooting an AK-47 in their back yard," he said. "This is a very frightening decision."
Daley said guns would not solve any problems in the country, but would result in higher taxes and insurance costs for Americans due to the need for more police officers and long-term health care for those who suffer serious gun injuries.
Chicago has seen a recent spate of gun violence affecting everyone from school children and teachers to the elderly. Marches and rallies have gathered hundreds of protesters who blame guns on the streets for the violent crime wave.
One such rally took place Wednesday night at 119th Street and Perry Avenue, where a 14-year-old was shot and killed over his bicycle. The boy's mother, along with city, state and religious leaders, turned out for the rally as the community struggles for solutions.
"Everybody is waking up, because when you see a group of people like this, that really lets you know that everyone is waking up and they want to see a change," said Herman Owens Jr., who attended the rally.
The Wednesday rally coincided with a gun buy-back program that gave those who turned in a gun a $100 Visa gift card.
The Chicago-area suburbs of Morton Grove, Oak Park, Wilmette and Evanston all have gun-control laws on the books and will likely become targets of NRA lawsuits.
The mother of a teenager shot to death while riding a Chicago bus last May is lashing out at the U.S. Supreme Court for striking down a ban on handguns.
Annette Nance-Holt said the decision to strike down the District of Columbia's ban illustrates how out of touch the justices are with the lives of regular people.
Nance-Holt said the justices live in safe neighborhoods where they don't have to worry about gun violence. She also said the decision shows society is more worried about guns than the children who are often innocent victims of gun violence.
Nance-Holt's 16-year-old son, Blair Holt, was killed and four others injured when someone opened fire on a city bus. Two teens have been charged with murder in connection with the slaying.
http://www.nbc5.com/news/16715323/detail.html?dl=mainclick