Let the guns thing go. Sheesh! Civil liberties like the right to bear arms does not know a political party.

Or how about this court case (h/t to The Volokh Conspiracy)

That’s U.S. v. Arzberger. The gun control law is the part of 18 U.S.C. § 3142(c)(1)(B) that requires that when someone is charged with possessing child pornography (among other crimes) and is freed on bail, he be ordered not to possess any firearm. Here’s the discussion by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV (of the Southern District of New York) (some paragraph breaks added):

A year ago, I might well have taken for granted the authority of Congress to require that a person charged with a crime be prohibited from possessing a firearm as a condition of pretrial release…. [But, given D.C. v. Heller, t]o the extent … that the Second Amendment creates an individual right to possess a firearm unrelated to any military purpose, it also establishes a protectible liberty interest [for Due Process Clause purposes]. And, although the Supreme Court has indicated that this privilege may be withdrawn from some groups of persons such as convicted felons, there is no basis for categorically depriving persons who are merely accused of certain crimes of the right to legal possession of a firearm.

Of course a more correct phrasing would be that “Heller hasn’t had a major impact, YET.

James,

Did you read the decision from the judge, due process was part of it.

But clearly Heller was also a strong part, let me quote the part since some people have reading difficulties.

A year ago, I might well have taken for granted the authority of Congress to require that a person charged with a crime be prohibited from possessing a firearm as a condition of pretrial release…. [But, given D.C. v. Heller, ]to the extent … that the Second Amendment creates an individual right to possess a firearm unrelated to any military purpose,

So, a year ago — before HELLER the Judge would have taken for granted the authority to require due process be violated….but AFTER HELLER the judge clearly recognized that

it also establishes a protectible liberty interest [for Due Process Clause purposes].

Note that the HELLER decision is being used to JUSTIFY the Due Process Clause purpose.

Cliff,

You are clearly missing the point that JD and I are making.

JD pointed out several cities that decided to remove their ban rather then go to court. Heller is having an impact there.

You are right, Heller was a narrowly crafted decision. But the decision included many avenues to explore and there will be court cases that are based on Heller.

Those cases haven’t worked their way though the system yet. For example, the Chicago laws case is still making its way through the appeals process.

Operative word – YET

Cliff,

You certainly are reaching to try to deny the obvious.

From your very own quote

as the suburb’s Village Board bowed to a new legal reality and repealed the ordinance.

Was there a legal challenge, No. They repealed the ban, in light of the “new legal reality” — HELLER, instead of fighting a loosing battle in court. That is a policy decision but it was reached in light of Heller, they didn’t repeal it until after the Heller Decision.

In your quote they acknowledge this

The board’s 5-1 vote came in response to last month’s ruling by a divided U.S. Supreme Court that struck down a similar ban. The high court ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects a person’s right to own a firearm for self-defense

Score one for the Heller Decision.

Love how you try to correlate firearm ownership with a lack of merit and economic prosperity….what a childish argument Cliff.

Will we be a country in which authority is measures by barrels and bullets?

Take away the right of the law abiding citizens to own firearms and that is exactly what we will have….is that what you are working toward?
A land of lawlessness, a land where thugs who don’t obey the laws are free to take what they want because you’ve disarmed everyone else?

The world and our neighborhoods will never be OK simply because we allow anyone to carry loaded, concealed weapons.

Anyone? Really Cliff, how little respect you show for your fellow citizens. How little trust you place in your fellow Americans. Guess you can’t help but show your elitism and disdain for the average person.

I have to agree with Cliff on this one. So a couple of podunk towns with insubstantial resources decide to cave to Heller out of fear of being sued. The fact that only a couple of towns has done this, while the majority of gun laws remain on the books – even while being challenged – leads me to believe that Heller has had minimal impact.

James,

Sorry to break this to you but the vast majority of gun laws haven’t being challenged.

A very few convicted criminals have challenged their arrests on gun related charges, a couple of towns, like that Podunk town of Chicago are having their bans work their way through the appeals process.

Then there is the changes in San Francisco that JD mentioned.

Heller has had minimal impact so far, after all the decision is less then a year old but that doesn’t mean that it will continue to have minimal impact.

Many states have had legislation introduced to expand the right to keep and bear arms, such as the proposal to allow Open Carry in Texas. That is currently illegal but thanks to the shift in momentum and attitude, in part produced by Heller, it stands a decent chance of being passed.

I really seems that those who don’t believe in the right to keep and bear arms is a minority

Seventy-five percent (75%) of Americans believe the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of an average citizen to own a gun, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Just 14% say gun ownership is not a constitutional right. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure.

Not all the impact of Heller will be limited to court cases…..

James?

How about you, Cliff?

What’s been the impact of Kelo?

It’s a TRAP!

Yes, James. I am.

what’s been the impact of Kelo? I mean, despite a few podunk towns enacting ordinances to counteract it….? And how long has it been since Kelo was decided?

I’m not comparing them on merit – only on impact since they were decided.

(Did you explain all the big words to Cliff or was he out front in his bathrobe again?)

Love the logic behind the anti-gun mentality.

Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Sorry but we are comparing apples to apples. Whether it is the 1st amendment right to free speech, the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms or the 5th amendment taking without just compensation and due process of law.

It is about our rights.

Somehow I think that this thread needs an update.

No?

Circuit Court, Weer’d.

I had the opportunity to chat with one of the lawyers involved, yesterday. He was pretty happy. He’s ready to move on the the next step…

This is the great civil rights movement of the century. Aren’t you glad you are here?!