Supreme Court to back right to bear arms

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The US Supreme Court appears ready to rule that Americans have a constitutional right to keep a gun in their home for self-defence, a ruling that could help Republicans in the upcoming presidential election.

Hearing the most important gun rights case in nearly 70 years, the justices on Tuesday spent 98 minutes engrossed in a lively debate about British and American legal traditions relating to the right to bear arms, especially in self-defence.

linky

[Jenn! 918]

Why would the ruling help republicans in the election?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Why would the ruling help republicans in the election?

I'll pass on the obvious gun joke since I don't want the secret service at my house.

[sara..... 371]

We are a family that hunts so im pretty happy to hear that but more important we live in the country so if we need police at any time it can take them up to two hours to respond to our home and we had to call them before .........we have a farm and every once in awhile we get the kids that like mmm mushrooms that grow in the fields that cows are in......or u get a bum that thinks ur barn is a good place to crash.........but i really would like to see everyone have to go thru a class like we did to carry a gun.......its not that easy to pass and it would sure make people think a couple of times of how they care for the guns in their homes and how they can keep them away from kids........

[Dan J 277]

This case is a bit ironic. Conservatives dont like activists on the supreme court. But in order to find the Washington DC law unconstitutional based on the second amendment, they have to be activists.

[rebeccajo 14]

LS, I think the title of your article is a bit flamboyant and premature.

The Justices just started hearing the case today, and a ruling is not expected until June.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/18/scotus.guns/index.html

[mawilson 2,133]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

[rebeccajo 14]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

I don't think that's even what the case is about. It's about whether or not the states, cities and municipalities have the right to establish their own laws. In the past the Court has given them that jurisdiction. This case seeks to have a local law overturned.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

LS, I think the title of your article is a bit flamboyant and premature.

The Justices just started hearing the case today, and a ruling is not expected until June.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/18/scotus.guns/index.html

I am flamboyant by nature.

[Jesse and Hema 2]

I am flamboyant by nature.

We can tell by your meez

[Nessa 23]

[Ban Hammer 13,643]

take away the choice of someone to own a gun, might as well review roe versus wade too.

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

I feel that the Washington DC Ban on handguns is unconstitutional. I can't believe that it took so long for this to come up. It is about time. It seems pretty certain of what the outcome is going to be.

[GaryC 7]

This case is a bit ironic. Conservatives dont like activists on the supreme court. But in order to find the Washington DC law unconstitutional based on the second amendment, they have to be activists.

No, they would have to be activists to decide that they could pass a law outlawing guns. You have it backwards. The constitution clearly states that we have the right to bear arms.

[HAL 9000 96]

If they ban the right to bear arms, the arms-bearing citizens should form a militia and overthrow the government.

Oohh seditious conspiracy. Sounds fun.