Comments on: More on the Parker Case

By: GeorgiaPacking

GeorgiaPacking — Sat, 09 Dec 2006 20:30:39 +0000

I did a read of the oral argument that K-Romulus posted in the earlier Parker Topic and after reading Joe’s and here I wonder why y’all are running to the extreams of what might happen instead of what was hinted at in the oral argument?

I don’t see this as either it is an individual right and multiple laws are overturned and I don’t see anyone but the crazy 9th circuit saying it is a collective right. I think the court will rule VERY narrowly that the 2nd is individual and Federal gov can resonably restrict certain persons (felons, mentally ill, domestic violence) and certain firarms (like rifles with certain features) but not an entire class of firearms (like all handguns, be it ownership or keeping them non-functional).

This, to my limited knowledge would keep every state’s firearm laws as they are, only federal gun laws would be at risk. Even the AWB would be upheld because it is not restricting all semi-automatic rifles, just some. Those prohibited by federal law from purchasing firearms would be ok, so long as it is not everyone.

I see the court ruling that parker has standing in the licenseing/permit, and saying that DC must use its discretion to allow handguns and cannot have an outright ban. If it is limited to that only, then no one has to be set free from prison unless they can show that they had applied and been turned down.
For a similar reason I think their might not be standing on the functional firearm issue to avoid overturning cases. To have standing in this case the person would have to have been issued a permit and then either be arrested for a loaded weapon.

In this way the laws are maintained and as long as DC at a minimum follows NYC may issue type of system then they are fine.

With such a ruling I highly doubt that DC would appeal and if parker appealed the standing issue, the SC would deny cert.

By: Front Sight, Press » Blog Archive » Interesting Discussion on the Parker Case

Sat, 09 Dec 2006 05:41:18 +0000

[...] Joe Huffman and Say Uncle are having a lively discussion on the possible implications of the Parker case (the challenge to the D.C. handgun ban) [...]

By: Kevin Baker

Kevin Baker — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 21:14:38 +0000

I’d link to it, but your system hates Blogspot. Read my “The Courts will not Save Us” trilogy. I think I answer your question there.

I expect, at most, that SCOTUS will dodge the question once again.

By: The View From North Central Idaho - Be careful what you wish for

The View From North Central Idaho - Be careful what you wish for — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 16:42:56 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 16:33:53 +0000

I’m not sure there’s much we can do for the next two years at the federal level. Work on the states. Defeating the AWB legislation in Washington is important. The Brady’s promised to get AWBs passed in a bunch of states after the federal ban expired. I don’t think there’s much chance they’ll get the federal ban back again in the next two years. If we can stop them in the states, it’ll be a big loss for their cause. Also on our agenda should be dumb carry restrictions, like Virginia’s restaurant ban, and Ohio’s car carry ridiculousness. Hopefully the Senate in Ohio will override Taft’s veto.