Sarah Brady Sends Me Email
Gotta Fisk it!
Emphasis was in the original.
Last week, a Federal Appeals Court overturned Washington D.C.’s long-standing restrictions on handguns a decision that endangers all of America’s gun laws.
Amen!
This case is most likely headed to the U.S. Supreme Court and we have a tidal wave of work to do before it gets there.
Okay, waiting for the checklist. Betcha it’s just sending in money.
This battle to its very core is the most important battle we have ever waged. We need your help today to build a strong Brady Gun Law Defense Fund to save America’s gun laws.
Send money? Strange tactic considering that writing your Congress Critter to have them rescind the handgun ban in DC would strike the case as moot. One would think that a) they’re just in it for the money and b) that there’s no way they’ve got the lobbying power to make that happen.
This fight is so critical to the safety and sanity of our nation that an anonymous donor has extended his challenge and will match dollar for dollar all gifts to this Brady Gun Law Defense Fund. Your gift will be fully tax deductible.
One would think that an anonymous donor is either a) bullshit, b) unwilling to attach their name to it for fear of torpedoing the effort, or c) knows this is a really unpopular thing to do.
The threat to all our gun laws is truly unprecedented.
Once again: Amen!
The hypocrisy of the ruling is astounding.
Followed by nothing to back that claim up.
What is at stake for you and your community? An emboldened gun lobby will use the ruling to challenge strong local, state and federal gun laws.
One could only hope, but the NRA, the largest “gun lobby” tried to torpedo the case.
… from the long-standing machine gun ban … to the 1968 Gun Control Act … to the Brady Background Check Law.
Well, there is no machine gun ban. Private citizens can still buy them in the majority of states. It’s difficult, but there’s no outright ban on them. Interesting how they don’t point out the year when that happened.
… to your local and state laws … like the ones in California and New Jersey banning Assault Weapons … and many more.
Ah, yes, the California Assault Weapons Ban — which now includes single-shot rifles.
I’m sure nobody thinks that one is outrageous.
Oh, and on the background check thing: I doubt this case could affect that. The issue at hand in Parker was a denial in issuance of a permit to own a handgun. The 5th Circuit said that the denial of the permit was unlawful, not the actual permit process itself. While I disagree with that notion I can’t imagine the precedent set by this case giving a good legal standing to overturn such processes.
Why is this ruling so radical? Because the decision defies almost 70 years of legal precedent. All courts before this save one have ruled that the Second Amendment is not an individual right to bear arms, and this is the first Federal Appeals Court ever to declare a gun law unconstitutional based on the Second Amendment.
The GeekWithA45 said we’d be hearing that bullshit phrase a lot pretty soon. Seems he’s right.
One court case rules against a guy that was a) dead and b) who’s council didn’t show up that says the arm in question wasn’t protected by the 2nd amendment because it was not suitable for militia defense.
They make it sound like 2nd amendment case have been brought up time and time again. They haven’t. The 5th Circuit’s ruling stands at odds with a recent 9th Circuit ruling which is why the Supreme Court is likely to hear that case. Incidentally the 9th Circuit is the most overturned Circuit court in the nation.
No wonder they’ve got the knickers in a twist. This would be the 2nd time in United States history that the Supreme Court hears a 2nd amendment case, and this time the defendants are going to show up!
In her dissent,
Meaning she was disagreeing with the now current legal precedent in her District…
Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote that Second Amendment rights relate to “Those militia whose continued vitality is required to safeguard the individual state.”
Sounds like something I’d write, actually. I won’t bother tearing that one apart. Y’all know the reasons I’m sure.
… And completely disregarded the democratically-expressed will of the people of the District of Columbia, depriving D.C. citizens of a strict handgun law enacted thirty years ago.
Yes, Sarah, that’s what courts do at the highest level: Strike down unconstitutional laws.
Shocking.
That’s not activism, that’s doing their job.
Talk about judicial activism! We can’t help but note the unbelievable hypocrisy here too. Conservatives cry and gnash their teeth about activism from the bench. This decision is judicial activism at its worst.
See above, this is how the court’s balance out the Legislative and Executive branch: striking down laws.
This is going to get interesting.