SCOTUS - Chicago

[Oh Shoot]

Well, preliminary arguments, from various news sources, seems to indicate that the Court is already leaning toward striking down Chi Town's handgun ban, according to various reports.

Even "Swing Vote" Kennedy seemed to indicate that the right is individual and fundamental.

So my guess remains the same: you'll be able to own a handgun anywhere in the US, but jumping through many local hoops will remain tediously legit, just as in D.C.

And of course, this won't affect carry laws in any state.

- OS

[Guest jackdm3]

Oh, to be a dealer when this gets stricken!

[mikegideon]

You beat me to the punch OhShoot. With the Heller case behind us, it would be tough for this to go wrong. The state of Illinios in general needs a good slap.

[Steelharp]

The state of Illinios in general needs a good slap.

It already flung a huge pile of to D.C.

[Oh Shoot]

... The state of Illinios in general needs a good slap.

It ain't the state, only ChiTown, Oak Park, maybe couple others.

- OS

[GLOCKMEISTER]

were getting ready to open a store up there when this thing all gets sorted out...

LOL... NOT!!!!

[mikegideon]

It ain't the state, only ChiTown, Oak Park, maybe couple others.

- OS

I know... it will still be a good slap. Why do you think they have all those stupid state laws? The whole game is in Chicago.

[MacGyver]

Talk of the Nation is covering it right now. Consensus seems to be that after the arguments - 5 justices seem to be in favor of striking the ban. It's funny to hear a pro-gun discussion on National Public Radio.

[saintsfanbrian]

If they are going to follow the precedent that they set - they have to strike the ban as unconstitutional. Otherwise the Heller case gets overturned soon on an appeal from DC.

Good luck. If this ban stays in place it is a bad thing for the rest of the country.

Remember - citizens can protect themselves - slaves cannot.

[Oh Shoot]

If they are going to follow the precedent that they set - they have to strike the ban as unconstitutional. Otherwise the Heller case gets overturned soon on an appeal from DC....

Yep.

"Justice Anthony M. Kennedy described the individual right to possess a gun as being of "fundamental character," like the right to freedom of speech. "If it is not fundamental, then Heller is wrong," Kennedy said, referring to the decision two years ago that struck down the handgun ban in the District of Columbia. Kennedy was part of the 5-4 majority in that case."

Justices signal they're ready to make gun ownership a national right - latimes.com

- OS

[G27]

If they get this one right, and based on everything I've read it appears they will, this will be a victory for liberty like we've not seen in a long time.

[E4 No More]

I can see the bedwetters having :poop:fits all around the nation!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

My concern is they won't go far enough. That is, making all the other ridiculous gun laws

BATFE uses unconstitutional, which they are.

[mikegideon]

Note that the LA Times is owned by Chicago based Tribune. They also own the Chicago Trib and WGN. I know their CEO. We had a brief email discussion about the SCOTUS case last week. Wish I could quote him.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Well, you could paraphrase;)

[GLOCKMEISTER]

yea...

[mikegideon]

i've always believed he's a smart guy. I STILL believe it

[Oh Shoot]

My concern is they won't go far enough. That is, making all the other ridiculous gun laws

BATFE uses unconstitutional, which they are.

No other issues will be ruled on except the one before them.

- OS

[mikegideon]

No other issues will be ruled on except the one before them.

- OS

That's how I read it.

[Smith]

Justices signal they're ready to make gun ownership a national right - latimes.com

- OS

Sad we've come so far, yet understand so little. It has been a right since the beginning. It has been taken away, not expanded.

[DavidD]

Looking good for us soo far...

[Guest 1817ak47]

this just made news on NBC and it sounds like it is going strong in favor of gun rights

[macville]

the SCOTUS needs to examine what the right to "bear" means because that would remove far more restrictions than anything else. I don't understand where they get this "reasonable restrictions" for the states from. Nothing in the 2d says anything about restrictions...you know that whole, shall not be "infringed"?

Matthew

[TMMT]

I had the chance to speak with a General Sessions Judge today and asked him his opinion of the case.

He said they would no doubt have to incorporate. Since the Heller ruling is now law they must look at this issue at hand thru Heller where the argument strongly favors incorporation.

He said that the slippery slope here is a ruling against incorporation would give counsel ammo to challenge other bread and butter cases on the incorporation grounds, if they rule against it.

He said its almost 98% assured

[G27]

I had the chance to speak with a General Sessions Judge today and asked him his opinion of the case.

He said they would no doubt have to incorporate. Since the Heller ruling is now law they must look at this issue at hand thru Heller where the argument strongly favors incorporation.

He said that the slippery slope here is a ruling against incorporation would give counsel ammo to challenge other bread and butter cases on the incorporation grounds, if they rule against it.

He said its almost 98% assured

Thanks, perfect update.

When some folks poopoo-ed the DC v Heller decision two years ago saying they didn't do enough in the ruling, I made the point that it was now a foundational decision on which other 2A rulings would be made and here we are today.

Heller will always be a hero to me.