Started By
Message
locked post

Heller v. District of Columbia........Round 2

Posted on 5/19/14 at 7:42 am
Posted by lsuroadie
South LA
Member since Oct 2007
8398 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 7:42 am
Commonly referred to as Heller II


quote:

Yesterday, Judge James E. Boasberg of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued an opinion addressing the claims remanded by the circuit court.



quote:

Judge Boasberg determined that the appropriate level of constitutional scrutiny was "intermediate scrutiny", which requires that the District can show that the challenged laws are "substantially related to an important governmental objective" and that the law is narrowly tailored to achieve that objective




quote:

Judge Boasberg's willingness to stretch to find D.C.'s laws constitutional was perhaps most apparent in his reasoning for upholding the requirement that registrants bring each firearm they wish to register to the police station for inspection.



quote:

Continuing the trend of treating the right to keep and bear arms differently from all other constitutional rights, the court also upheld the District's requirement that a registrant must pass an exam before registering any firearms. Most these days would consider a competency test for the exercise of any of the rights protected by the First Amendment or the right to vote unthinkable, but such tests were deemed constitutional, at least in the District, when it comes to Second Amendment rights.



quote:

While upholding the registration requirements in their entirety required an unusual degree of deference to the D.C. Council in the face of a fundamental right, Judge Boasberg's discussion of the handgun rationing provision, which limits registrants to only one handgun registration in a 30 day period, is perhaps even more troubling. In upholding the rationing provision, the court found that "the District must respect the right of each resident to possess a handgun . . . for self-defense" and "[w]hile one or two firearms may be necessary for such purposes, a large collection of weapons is not." Although D.C. law limits applicants to registering only one handgun each month, Judge Boasberg seemed willing to endorse the constitutionality of laws that would restrict individuals to possessing only one or two firearms at any given time



Remember all of the sarcastic quotes from a want, asurob, and other progresseives on the PB, whenever we have a gun control thread....oooohhh the irony. Case in point gentlemen...case in point.

LINK


:nb4 they're coming to get your guns:
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
422503 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 7:46 am to
quote:

the court also upheld the District's requirement that a registrant must pass an exam before registering any firearms

this is very funny when compared to voting

voting, which is not an explicitly stated right, cannot be restricted by an exam

possession of arms, however, which is explicitly stated in its very own amendment, can?
Posted by Truckasaurus
Alabama
Member since May 2014
336 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 7:47 am to
quote:

Continuing the trend of treating the right to keep and bear arms differently from all other constitutional rights


This seems like a loaded statement.

What constitutional right isn't somewhat limited?
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
422503 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 7:51 am to
quote:

This seems like a loaded statement.

strict scrutiny is the standard for fundamental rights. i don't think any right listed in the constitution is not under strict scrutiny except for content-neutral speech (which is intermediate scrutiny)
Posted by wickowick
Head of Island
Member since Dec 2006
45810 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 7:53 am to
shall not be infringed...
Posted by Truckasaurus
Alabama
Member since May 2014
336 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 7:57 am to
quote:

shall not be infringed...


There's a Wikipedia article called "US Free Speech Exceptions"

LINK
Posted by lsuroadie
South LA
Member since Oct 2007
8398 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:00 am to
quote:

What constitutional right isn't somewhat limited?



the 2A has more restrictions than all others combined
Posted by Five0
Member since Dec 2009
11354 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:16 am to
quote:

a Wikipedia article


Because this is the one true authority when arguing Con Law.
Posted by Truckasaurus
Alabama
Member since May 2014
336 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:21 am to
quote:

Because this is the one true authority when arguing Con Law.


Wait...

Is this board anti-Wikipedia too?!

Wikipedia?!?!

A non-government affiliated non-profit run website where anyone can edit? The well-cited, facts-only encyclopedia of the internet?
Posted by dante
Kingwood, TX
Member since Mar 2006
10669 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:22 am to
If only the government would restrict voters from voting more than once
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73444 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:24 am to
quote:

where anyone can edit
Yeah peeps like Rex can?


All you fricking need to know.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
123921 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:26 am to
quote:

Is this board anti-Wikipedia too?!


but you did address a 2ndA reference, with a Wikipedia article addressing the 1stA.
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
98816 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:28 am to
common sense requirements for gun ownership...
Posted by Truckasaurus
Alabama
Member since May 2014
336 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:32 am to
quote:

but you did address a 2ndA reference, with a Wikipedia article addressing the 1stA.


Sorry. Didn't make it clear. My point was that even our fundamental rights have limits, including free speech.

Why should gun ownership not have "reasonable" limits? Whatever that might mean.
This post was edited on 5/19/14 at 8:34 am
Posted by boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
80247 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:38 am to
Appellate courts for the win.

The Consititution wins again!
Posted by Rickety Cricket
Premium Member
Member since Aug 2007
46883 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:40 am to
quote:

this is very funny when compared to voting

I can smell the hypocrisy from here
Posted by DelU249
Austria
Member since Dec 2010
77625 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:42 am to
I no longer care...DC has had rampant gun violence since enacting it. Let them burn


Posted by Alahunter
Member since Jan 2008
90738 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:42 am to
quote:

Why should gun ownership not have "reasonable" limits? Whatever that might mean


Why should people with "unreasonable" ideas, be able to make those "reasonable" limits?
Posted by DelU249
Austria
Member since Dec 2010
77625 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:43 am to
quote:

If only the government would restrict voters from voting more than once



that's racist, you're ignorant...that's ignorant
Posted by Truckasaurus
Alabama
Member since May 2014
336 posts
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:45 am to
quote:

Why should people with "unreasonable" ideas, be able to make those "reasonable" limits?


Constitutionally elected individuals and confirmed appointees?

If you don't like it, vote them out.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram