Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Posted: 10/1/2007 3:25:42 PM EST
I'm following this case about as closely as I can. Given what happened last friday, can someone (preferably a lawyer) comment on what this might mean for a reversal of the 1986 MG "ban"?

Basically, it sounds like the DC circuit sufficiently narrowed the case down to the issue of legality of the handgun ban as long as rifles and shotguns are still permitted to be owned without the "disassemble-or-lock" section. I'm not all up on protocol for cases SCOTUS hears. If they hear the case, can they still make an opinion that goes beyond what they are being asked to rule on (which now seems to have been narrowed quite a bit) ?
Link Posted: 10/1/2007 3:50:57 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/1/2007 3:51:53 PM EST by StudentofLiberty]

Originally Posted By jhm:
I'm following this case about as closely as I can. Given what happened last friday, can someone (preferably a lawyer) comment on what this might mean for a reversal of the 1986 MG "ban"?


It means nothing for the '86 ban.



Basically, it sounds like the DC circuit sufficiently narrowed the case down to the issue of legality of the handgun ban as long as rifles and shotguns are still permitted to be owned without the "disassemble-or-lock" section. I'm not all up on protocol for cases SCOTUS hears. If they hear the case, can they still make an opinion that goes beyond what they are being asked to rule on (which now seems to have been narrowed quite a bit) ?

The Heller/parker case has nothing to do with NFA law. We don't even know IF the supremes will hear it, but if they do they can make their ruling as narrrow or broad as they want. Most likely they willl make it as narrow as possible. Anything they say on the subject can and will be used against us in a court of law, but any clarification of the 2nd will probably be a good thing for us in the long run. But they will not directly overturn any other laws.
They do need to clarify the confusion between the district courts, but they might even try to sidestep that, or strike down the current Helller ruling.
Link Posted: 10/1/2007 4:36:52 PM EST
Should Heller go in our favor, it would provide excellent basis for taking down 922(o).
Link Posted: 10/1/2007 4:41:01 PM EST
Clearly, it has nothing to do directly with the MG ban. But the hope was that a ruling in favor of the DC circuit ruling would help to pave the way for a battle to get rid of the mg ban. I guess my main question was if the scotus *had* to rule solely on the question presented to them or if they could, with a strike of their pen, make it MUCH harder or easier on us on virtually any 2nd amendment topic.
Link Posted: 10/1/2007 6:01:02 PM EST
RIght after the MG ban is repealed, I bet the Islamic terrorist will quit fighting and world peace will happen and that South Carolina beauty queen will be smart and I will win the lottery and frogs will grow wings so they don't bump their poor little asses when they jump and I won't get fat eating McDonalds and most of all, I will have game to pick up the hottest chicks on earth!

I would love it as much as the next guy but the general public hates guns and once enough of the general public realizes we can easily own mg's, we are screwed.
Link Posted: 10/1/2007 6:35:51 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/1/2007 6:42:26 PM EST by Top_Secret]
As much as I would love to see it, it won't bring us back to the "buy a thompson at the hardware store" days, but the fact of the matter is that it is not "easy" by any means to own a machinegun. The limiting factor today is artificially inflated prices due to the closing of the MG registry. And quite frankly we shouldn't have to give a shit about what the public thinks of it. There is this amendment in the constitution, something about shall not be infringed. The public still thinks we can buy machineguns anyways, have you caught any of the assault weapon pieces that the news makes? They show videos of full autos like any gangbanger can walk in the local gun store and buy one.

I don't understand why some people believe this is a pipedream, is it really that hard to imagine with the progress that has been made as of late? People are becoming more informed. CCW is now in effect in most States, the AW ban died with a whimper, we can buy SBRs and Silencers and pre-86 MGs, why is it that getting Section 922(o) declared unconstitutional such a impossible feat?
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 6:18:19 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2007 8:19:49 AM EST by TRWalsh]

Originally Posted By Top_Secret:
As much as I would love to see it, it won't bring us back to the "buy a thompson at the hardware store" days, but the fact of the matter is that it is not "easy" by any means to own a machinegun. The limiting factor today is artificially inflated prices due to the closing of the MG registry. And quite frankly we shouldn't have to give a shit about what the public thinks of it. There is this amendment in the constitution, something about shall not be infringed. The public still thinks we can buy machineguns anyways, have you caught any of the assault weapon pieces that the news makes? They show videos of full autos like any gangbanger can walk in the local gun store and buy one.

I don't understand why some people believe this is a pipedream, is it really that hard to imagine with the progress that has been made as of late? People are becoming more informed. CCW is now in effect in most States, the AW ban died with a whimper, we can buy SBRs and Silencers and pre-86 MGs, why is it that getting Section 922(o) declared unconstitutional such a impossible feat?


I agree, This case can go 3 ways:

1. DC residents can win big and we all can win a little.
2. We can all win really big.
3. We can all lose really big.

The plaintff(s) and their counsel were very wise in this case to bring the issue STRICTLY as a violation of the 2nd Amendment. The DC govt's warped argument thus far has been that there is no 2nd Amendment in DC because the 2nd Am. only applies to a state's right to have a militia and DC is not a state.

The DC Circuit court disagreed and said the DC handgun ban is unconstitutional because the 2nd Am. DOES guarantee an individual's right to keep and bear arms. The DC govt. is appealing that ruling. IF THE SCOTUS TAKES THE CASE, THE ISSUE BEFORE THEM WILL BE A 2ND AMENDMENT CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE. They will finally have to answer the big question once and for all. "Does the 2nd Amendment guarantee an individual's right to keep and bear arms?" Yes or No?

This is what we all want, and if they take the case and we win, it will be a great day for freedom. If they take the case and we lose, then we all lose really big. If SCOTUS doesn't take the case, the residents in DC still win their right to handguns back, which would be good for all of us, too, because the DC Circuit court's rulings are very influential in other courts around the country.

I for one, am very optimistic about this, either way.

And yes, if an individual's right to keep and bear arms is affirmed by SCOTUS, I think it would serve as a good basis to challenge 922(o), and other state & city AW / handgun bans.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 9:31:33 AM EST
i think the only way the mg ban will go is if something happens that indirectly voids it.
could you imagine the media if we went to court to over turn the machine gun ban? i doubt any gun rights group would touch it with a 10 foot pole.
what we need to happen is let the weed people go after the commerce clause, they get their dope and we get cheap guns.
the mg ban was a test run for a weed ban.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 10:17:48 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 10:26:21 AM EST

Originally Posted By twckxbzd:
what we need to happen is let the weed people go after the commerce clause

That already happened (Raich) and the commerce clause became effectively omnipotent.
Link Posted: 10/8/2007 6:29:58 AM EST
don't we HAVE the whole NFA structure cause of the weed people?
Link Posted: 10/8/2007 6:53:54 AM EST
the funny thing about it is that Machine gun owners are the MOST law abiding citizens there are and there are 0% crime caused with LEGAL (yes I said Legal) Machine guns.

So overturning the MG 86 ban would not change the way we the law abiding citizens who already have Machine Guns would do business... We would still have to go through all the paperwork, CLEO process and or trust process and it would not change a thing as far as the ATF goes. It would just allow us Law abiding MG owners to have more to choose from and lower the prices in a major way.

So all in all I dont see how that would make life anymore dangerous for anyone. We are already MG owners who have proved ourselves to the ATFNFA so what is the big deal in the first place?? Other than our country flexing their anti gun right muscles yet AGAIN!!!
Top Top