U.S. Supreme Court takes up gun-rights case


It's the first time since 1939 that the justices will confront the Constitution's right to bear arms.

Washington - The US Supreme Court has agreed to examine one of the most disputed provisions of the Constitution – the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

On Tuesday, the justices announced they will take up an appeal involving the constitutionality of a Washington, D.C., law that bans the use or possession of all handguns.

The case is expected to make guns a key issue in next year's presidential and congressional elections, with the high court likely to hand down a decision in late June – four months before voters go to the polls.

Analysts are calling it political dynamite.


"This will be one of the biggest decisions ever to come down at that part of the political schedule," says Paul Helmke, president of the Washington-based Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

"For the first time in history we could get a definitive ruling on what the Second Amendment really means," adds Dave Workman, an editor at Gun Week in Bellevue, Wash. "Gun rights is going to become a centerpiece of the 2008 presidential race, whether these guys like it or not."

The case, District of Columbia v. Heller, will take the justices back to the founding of the republic to the speeches and writings of the framers themselves in an effort to decode a constitutional enigma that has divided appeals court judges and the nation's most distinguished legal scholars.

More?

U.S. Supreme Court takes up gun-rights case | csmonitor.com

This may turn out to be the biggest gunfight since the OK Corral..

__________________
"Destiny must be shaped and not left to mere chance."..Spencer Collins

Wow.

It will be interesting to see which cases they pull out as precidence on this one.

This whole case will be very interesting indeed. I don't even know where I stand on the subject.

__________________

I don't see a problem with responsible adults owning firearms.

At the same time, I recognize that the founding fathers never considered weapons that can kill 50 people in 20 seconds, such as assault weapons.

I am thinking that the question that will be put before them is 'Isthe 2nd amendment referring to the general populus or to the militia?' THAT is the reason why I think that the precidence will be interesting.

I think the case is interesting ... but I don't understand why it's supposed to be such a big deal with the presidential election. It's past anybody doing anything except SOCTUS.

Very interesting thought. Here's the the 2nd Ammendment: "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 language doesn't limit gun ownership to militias but was that the intent? Will we ever know? It also only says the right to bear arms. I agree with you that it doesn't specify what arms. A slingshot is a weapon as well as an assault rifle, although I doubt that's what they meant either.

I'm ambivalent to guns in the hands of responsible and trained owners, but I think backrground checks and mandatory training aren't a bad thing either. The ammendment doesn't say that the government can't require that you be properly trained to own your gun.

I grew up with 3 brothers and a Dad and Grandad who would hunt because my brothers liked to. I also have a rifle and a shotgun by default (belonged to hubbo's dad). I will not have ammo in the house though. And I will not use them unless I receive training or target shoot with someone who has. (I don't hunt, btw, and haven't gone target shooting in about 25 or 30 years.)

__________________

This may be an isue in the way that gay marriage was an issue in the last election.

It's up to the Judiciary, but there may be a knee jerk reaction from the decision.

I kind of thought that too, but you know how the mud gets dragged in. Bush appointed a conservative court so everybody will get pommelled by it even if they had nothing to do with it. On both sides. Depending on who approved what justice and the verdict.

__________________

I don't think we will ever see a total ban on hand guns upheld by the SC.I believe the court will allow for reasonable regulations.At any rate,this should prove to be an interesting argument!

__________________
"Destiny must be shaped and not left to mere chance."..Spencer Collins

Any case that shows a person being mugged or burgled and defended him/herself should do...

Any conclusion that denies this will say people can't defend themselves...

I don't see how that could ever happen...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd