Back to topic.....Washington DC's has filed a petition with the Supreme Court to challenge the Circuit Court ruling that nullified the DC gun law (which prohibited registration of handguns, thus banning all hand guns -- as a DC resident, I personally thought it was far too restrictive)
If the SCOTUS takes the case (it will decide when it convenes next month), it could be the first time the Court rules on the scope of the Second Amendment in 68 years -- not since U.S. v. Miller in 1939.
DC's arguments:
Quote:
It contends the Circuit Court majority made three errors:
first, "its characterization of the nature of the Second Amendment right (which is linked to state militias)";
second, "its understanding of the scope of the right (which protects against federal interference with state militias and state gun laws)";
and, third, "its conclusion that the right, however it might be construed, is infringed by the District's law (which is targeted at the special dangers created by handguns and allows the possession of rifles and shotguns)." It argues that "each error independently requires reversal."
http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletyp...d_amendme.html
|
I'll look forward to the discussion if the Court takes the case.
***
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by omega48038
How will a law prevent someone who ignores laws from obtaining a gun?
The reasonable gun control that you cite is already in effect.
1). Background checks - Already done, local, state and federal level
2). Registration - Already done
3). Gun show loopholes - No such thing. The same laws apply to gun show purchases as any other transaction.
4). Child Locks - Federally mandated
All of the above rely on one simple fact, the law abiding already willingly comply, the law ignoring never will.
|
Laws like the Brady Bill make it more difficult for those who shouldnt have guns to acquire such weapons. (I will have to look into the issue of background checks at gun shows)
My point, in response to
earlier mischaracterizations of gun control advocates and implications that gun control means banning guns,(dk's assertion that liberal haters of the Constitution are trying to take away his guns) was that reasonable gun control helps and does not infringe on rights of law abiding and mentally stable citizens.
And while 1,500 accidental deaths/yr by guns may not represent a national epidemic, legal gun owners are still more likely to cause a tragic accidental death of a family member of friend than to use the weapon with deadly force against a potential criminal.