The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Blu wrote:joe,

citzens in dc need a permit and registration to buy a handgun

Correct, but this is also something which is being challenged in the courts and by guess who? Yep the NRA, and they will win.

Blu

The Second Amendment right is not a right to keep and carry any weapon in any manner and for any purpose. The Court has upheld gun control legislation including prohibitions on concealed weapons and possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, and laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. The historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons supports the holding in United States v. Miller that the sorts of weapons protected are those in common use at the time.


it would be hard for them to overturn the above case law but good luck to them (nra) wish our NRA had the same balls !
big problem we have is the sovereignty of parliament Principal which is in our constitution! thus the courts cannot never ever overturn an act of parliament! no matter how 'unconstitutional' it maby......

although under the Judaical review by the high court, may declare an act of parliament to be un captable with the human rights act 1998 but that all the court does...it declares it, parliament are not bound to do anything and may choose to simply ignore the courts declaration !

joe,

The Second Amendment right is not a right to keep and carry any weapon in any manner and for any purpose.

I never said it was Joe, what the NRA is now fighting the DC city council in court over is the way they are hindering the issue of permits and other conditions under which pistols are kept in the home. The DC council is making it as hard as possible for people to acquire a Concealed Pistol Permit by putting unnecessary obstacles in the way of the process.

The Court has upheld gun control legislation including prohibitions on concealed weapons and possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill,

Joe those rules apply to all firearms including long guns and not just concealed firearms.

laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings

Actually mate if a concealed pistol permit holder is picking someone up from a school or a government building they may take the gun onto the property but not into the building itself.

and laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

Again mate that law like the first two you posted has been around for as long as I can remember and has always been accepted as right and proper by all.
No it wouldn't, it's already been done. In her dissent, Circuit Judge Henderson of the Court of Appeals stated that Second Amendment rights did not extend to residents of Washington D.C., writing:

To sum up, there is no dispute that the Constitution, case law and applicable statutes all establish that the District is not a State within the meaning of the Second Amendment. Under United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. at 178, the Second Amendment's declaration and guarantee that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" relates to the Militia of the States only. That the Second Amendment does not apply to the District, then, is, to me, an unavoidable conclusion.

That was later overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States 5 - 4

parliament are not bound to do anything and may choose to simply ignore the courts declaration !

Okay but if IIRC correctly The High Court is not the end of the line over there, or is that not and never been the case? Well parliament might choose to ignore it mate but they get away with it if folks don't challenge them on it.

Blu