What this decision also shows is the schytzophrenic nature of this court is, and how dangerous Justice Kennedy is.

This case did nothing but re-afirm original intent. Something that tends to be ignored by legislatures and courts a like.

What this decision also re-afirmed is that there are 4 lawyers on the court pretending to be Supreme Court justices.

They are activly trying to re-write the constitution rather than do their job of interpriting whether laws that are written violate the constitution.

In the last we week these 4 lawyers have given foriegn ILLEGAL combatents held OUTSIDE of US Teritory the right to Habeus Corpus, a right researved for American citizens in the american LEGAL SYSTEM. No where in the Constitution can you find any hint that gives forigners rights to our criminal system let alone while commiting acts of war or terror.

While at the same time they try to strike down a right that is explisivly spelled out in the constitution and is backed up by the writings of the founders of the country.

Justice Kennedy is dangerous because he is niether ruled by constitutional interpritation or idealogical doctrine He is psychotic in the Random basis of his decisions and is a human tool of russion ruelett where our rights are concerned.

>>My right to bear arms, to self-defend, is a God-given right. <<

Does that include the right to carry a machine gun - or bear hand-grenades, ride a tank - in public places if the risk is deemed high enough?

If you were suddenly attacked by a gang in London, you'd really need a machine-gun to fend them off. Where did God say I can't carry a machine-gun on the London Tube?

brilliant Noel!

The problem is our Yanky friends would think the 'London Tube' was a punk band.

Noel

I don't think you'd need a machine gun on the tube but I wouldn't mind if the thugs in the carraige had to consider the possibility that I was carrying a handgun.

There is a vast cultural difference between America and Europe on this question. Our system is that we give up our right to carry a gun and the state protects us. How's that going?

Like a plague, murder by knife has taken London by storm. Gang members have said that killing someone is like a status symbol. It's in fashion. Taking little to no provocation this so called fashion of knife murders gives no warning.

On Saturday an anti violence rally was held. Mark Prince spoke to the thousands that attended. He spoke of forgiveness for the person who stabbed his son Kiyan, 15, to death. Anti gun campaigner Pat Regan was suppose to address the rally. She was found murdered on the floor of her flat on June 2.

When I'm in America I feel safe and relaxed on the streets at night to an extent I have never known in an Irish or British city.

>>When I'm in America I feel safe and relaxed on the streets at night to an extent I have never known in an Irish or British city.<<

Henry, just because you feel safe doesn't mean you are.
Some American cities have a murder rate more than 20 times that of London, the most dangerous city in UK or Ireland. Even in NY (AFAIK the safest large city in the US) the murder rate is about 3 times higher than in London.

When Michael Winner featured Charles Bronson in the film 'Death Wish', where an enraged husband takes vengeance on street muggers by shooting them, it became a box office smash both here and the US.
He made two more follow-up versions.
Clearly the public have sympathy with a proportionate response to defending themselves.
I'd certainly like to possess a 'Saturday Night Special'.

Noel the judgement was on handguns, the court acknowledged the basic restrictions like on machine guns that a fanatic like you wouldn't understand.

Also each city in the US that has a high Murder rate is a city that has made it ILLEGAL for law abiding citizens to carry firearms. Every city that has adopted a right to carry program crime has droped dramaticly.

Facts which are alien to you, prove every time that when gun restriction are removed from law abiding citizens crime rates drop.

>>the basic restrictions like on machine guns that a fanatic like you wouldn't understand.<<

I was addressing Patty's principle, which was obviously way above your head.

>>Also each city in the US that has a high Murder rate is a city that has made it ILLEGAL for law abiding citizens to carry firearms.<<

That's clearly not true.

>>Every city that has adopted a right to carry program crime has droped dramaticly.<<

That's not true either.

>>every time that when gun restriction are removed from law abiding citizens crime rates drop.<<

Neither is that.

I presume you got your name at the end right, though.

The Supreme Court correctly decided that there can be no outright ban on handguns due to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. That does not mean there can not be some reasonable regulation of handguns and other weapons.

As for those who believe that the right to a handgun derives not from the Constitution, but from God, I think they understand neither.

>>can be no outright ban on handguns due to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.<<

How / by whom can such amendments be changed or dropped, mahons?

"My right to bear arms, to self-defend, is a God-given right"

My views on the safety of US cities versus British (in the US murders sometimes don't even make the news versus we still count our crimes via headlines) aside, sorry Mahons but that's just so much dramatic gushy American nonsense.

Your right to bear arms is afforded to you by the Constitution and by the bunch of blokes who drew it up. It wasn't God determining yesterday's ruling. And if it had gone the other way I seriously doubt he would have sent lightening bolts and a plague of locusts to display his displeasure.

Noel: Thankfully it is difficult to amend the Constitution which avoids us enshrining the political hot topic of the day as a Constitutional amendment.

An amendment must first be proposed and pass both houses of Congress by 2/3 vote. There is a provision that a proposal could go to 2/3 of the state legislatures, but this has never been done. After the porposal passes, it must be ratified by 3/4 of the states trough their legislatures.

There is no desire or will in the U.S. for an amendment that would tamper with the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. The first ten amendments to the Constitution here are known as the Bill of Rights.

My favorite amendment of course was the repeal of Prohibition of alcohol.

Alison: I didn't opine on the safety of British verse American cities, if you read the above more carefully. And I didn't write that the right to bear arms was God-given. I wrote quite the opposite.

Thanks mahons, it's clear all those safeguards can't be overcome easily. There is, however, always a danger that the sovereignty of the people is trumped by mere tradition and bureaucracy.

Alison, I think you made the cardinal error of confusing mahons with Patty!

So these God given rights, are they only given to Americans?

Patty not Mahons. I wondered where all this God bothering had come from.

Yeah sorry Mahons i thought you were Patty.

How does it feel to be Gods chosen people though anyway. Are you above or below the Jews in pecking order do you reckon?

XD

(sorry Patty it was a JOKE)

The gun nuts are dancing in the streets, but the court's split decision is nothing to celebrate.

I will fight hard to maintain the gun restrictions in my city, that have made it over time the safest big city in America.

Europeans have nothing to learn from gun-happy America on this matter, unless they want to see their homicide rates over time approach those of the USA.

The carnage on American streets, esp in the pistol packin' South, will never end. Congratulations to the blood-drenched leadership of the National Rifle Association.

--
--As for those who believe that the right to a handgun derives not from the Constitution, but from God, I think they understand neither--

Correct. Its laughable.

"Thou shalt have the right to carry a .357 Magnum"-- Manson, 3:16

Alison: You've said some tough things about me over the years, but calling me Patty takes the cake (or biscuit).

Mahoons (& Alison): "As for those who believe that the right to a handgun derives not from the Constitution, but from God, I think they understand neither."

You know nothing of the founding of America. Nor of freedom.

Freedom is not given to me (or to you, Frank). It is your right as a human. A God given right.

Govt. can take it away - imprison me, or hold me hostage in a regulated state - but it is my right given to me by God. And the Founders of America knew this, addressed it and ensured that people (the King of old or the liberals of today) would not succeed in messing with it.

Noel: Machine guns on the subway? This is addressing the issue? Listen , criminals and maniacs carry machine guns on the subway. (although I have never heard of this, I'm sure it could happen)

I'm addressing the right of law-abiding citizens to carry handguns.

How does one possibly derive support for a right to carry guns around the place from the fellow who said "Turn the other cheek"?

Its not possible that such support came from God, certainly not the Christian God

Alison: God bothering?

Still laughing about abortion on demand!

Phantom: People misconstrue the meaning of "Turn the other cheek" to mean that they should be permanent victims to evil.

Patty - I actually like the founding fathers, an inspiring bunch who shook the world. But one hardly thinks their views on such things as slavery or women's rights were derived from De Almighty (as Bob Marley would say).

God's blessings, if one is inclined to believe in God as I do, do not include a right to handguns. Indeed, had the Big Fella intended that, Adam and Eve could have shot the snake dead.

Mahons: "I actually like the founding fathers,"

Indeed!

Your arrogance always makes me laugh.

And your stupidity makes me wince.

Patty

Well it must mean something. And I don't think it was that we should be Charles Bronsons or Clint Eastwoods walking bow legged down Main Street asking punks if they feel lucky today

>>I'm addressing the right of law-abiding citizens to carry handguns.<<

Patty, but that's your interpretation of the rights God gave you. I was talking about MY God-given right to carry a machine-gun.

Like yours, this right is of divine origin and requires no justification, but if it did, I could say I could be suddenly attacked by a vicious gang. The only was to defend yourself in that situation is with a machine-gun. Everyone should carry one. You know it makes sense.

Also, one reads those frightening reports of people who get shot from a passing car by gangsters who mistook them for someone else. Well, with all the armour those bastards protect themselves with, I'm afraid even a machine-gun won't help here. However, a well-lobbed hand-grenade is just the man to sort them out and protect yourself.

I therefore hold my right to bear a brace of hand-grenades and a loaded machine-gun at all times to be God-given and inviolable, etc.

And this of course goes for everybody - all those illegal immigrants, all races, the poor and destitute, Arabs in Los Angeles.

Noel: Yep...there is a difference between liberal-think and myself.

"Nothing to live or die for...no religion, too." That's liberal.

Conflating self-defense with criminal conduct. That's liberal.

Not relying on "self" for defense. ...liberal.

Handing over freedom to the governement....liberal.

Not trusting individuals to educate and raise their children....liberal.

Not trusting law-abiding adult individuals to make decisions regarding how and why to use a gun....liberal.

Infantalizing citizens through welfare and solutions to everyday problems....liberal.

Still laughing about abortion on demand!

Nope. Actually I was laughing at handguns on demand. Which essentially means the right to blow someones head off on demand. By God's decree. Apparently.

ps. Patty i think you are confused over the word "liberal". It's true meaning is the total opposite of all the statements you made to Noel, defining it above. Your own constitution was born out of LIBERAL values.

Its the Rush Limbahhh use of the term, where it is basically a curse word, invective used against "the left"

Oh right. Course. He's a giant blowhard with a small brain that bloke.

(he sort of tries to be like General Norman Schwarzkopf of the media world. They look a bit alike though)

>>Yep...there is a difference between liberal-think and myself.<<

Patty, yes, they're terrible, those liberals.

But in this point at least Im on your side. Actually, to be honest, you're a bit of a wet liberal in my eyes here, with your paltry "handgun"! ( I mean, how can you expect any decent criminal to take that seriously!).

But the main thing is that at least you didn't disagree with my right to carry around those hand-grenades and machine-guns.

Self defense is a natural right. Defense to protect another life is a natural right. The Bill of Rights was written and adopted "in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its power" by the federal government. It has nothing to do with God or God given gun rights, it was expressly written with the purpose of restraining national government's inclination to control and over-regulate the people's autonomy.

When the States' insisted on the inclusion of the Bill of Rights, particularly the 1st and 2nd amendments, they were trying to ensure the basic ability of the people to be able to overthrow (or protect themselves from)the government if need be at some point in the future.

I believe law abiding citizens should have the right to bear arms responsibly. I am a gun owner and I don't believe my right to own firearms comes from God.

Daphne

Should there be any limits on where you can carry your firearm?

Should a private business owner be able to have a no firearms policy inside his place of business?

Should passengers be allowed to pack heat when taking commercial flights?

Should spectators at an 80,000 seat football stadium owned by the state each be permitted to carry pistols to the big game?

Mahons: I have so not ever said tough things about you. TO you possibly but about you?! C'monnnn. Getting you mixed up with Patty was priceless though. I read this post and really thought you'd lost it :D You back on the Bud?

I rarely agree with Patty's views. Plus she's a terrrrrrrrible chauvinist and doesn't get my jokes. But I do respect Patty. I think she fights her corner pretty damn well. Honestly i reckon the woman needs grenades, clusterbombs and RPGs for her posts.

Sure Phantom, I think there should be reasonable guidelines for carrying a gun. I think the government and business owners should be able to enact sensible safety rules and restrict access to some types of weapons.

I don't think the government should restrict our right to own and keep handguns or rifles/shotguns in our homes or on our private property.

Daphne

What about my specific examples? You say "some types of weapons" and I don't know what that means.

Should the business owner be able to implement a flat ban on any firearm on his property?

A football stadium may be and often is owned by the state or town, not by a private firm. What do you think should be the policy in those venues? If the city owns the stadium should they be able to ban all firearms [ and knives etc ] ?

If the city bans firearms on its property should the state be able to override them, forcing them to allow firearms in any "public place"?

Again, you say "some types of weapons", which implies that some should be permitted.

What if any weapon should passengers be able to take aboard a commercial aircraft?

So, you want specifics! Okay.....

Should there be any limits on where you can carry your firearm?

I really don't think so for people who are licensed to carry, but since we are going to have restrictions on where you can legally carry a weapon, the authorities have a duty to make sure no guns will be in those off limit areas - which means screening everyone like they do at courthouses.

Should a private business owner be able to have a no firearms policy inside his place of business?

Yes

Should passengers be allowed to pack heat when taking commercial flights?

Yes, people who have a concealed carry license should be able to pack heat on an airplane. Handguns are a perfectly acceptable choice - they holster nicely or can be stowed in a handbag easily. A 9mm would be an excellent choice for unobtrusive protection.

Should spectators at an 80,000 seat football stadium owned by the state each be permitted to carry pistols to the big game?

Yes, people who have a concealed carry license should be allowed to carry pistols to the big game. Once again, unless the stadium owners (city or private) can ensure a completely gun free venue, what's the problem if I bring my gun along?

Look, it's pretty obvious that there are many weapons that have no business being owned by people outside of law enforcement or the military - Noel's machine guns are a good example. There's just no need for the regular joe to own that type of firepower.

Ooh boy

The day that pistols are allowed on overcrowded planes filled with pissed off passengers is the day that I stop flying. I mean it. At least the Euros would never consider permitting such a thing, so I'd still be making my trips to Europe, but I would take the car to Florida or Chicago, every time.

There's just no way any US govt or airline would ever allow guns on planes, though. It would be a terrorists greatest dream, to allow passengers to carry guns on planes.

Mohammad Atta was a law abiding citizen on Sept 10 2001, so maybe he should have been able to bring a gun aboard too. Under your policy, a group of terrorists, legally in the US, with clean records could all stroll past the metal detector so as to have a small armed militia on an airplane.

Discharging a weapon on an in flight aircraft could pierce the skin of the plane. Repeated shots can mean repeated piercing of the skin of the craft, making it unstable.

Have never been under the impression that there are significant numbers of assaults on airplane flights.

Lets rethink this one.

-----

--Once again, unless the stadium owners (city or private) can ensure a completely gun free venue, what's the problem if I bring my gun along?--

Huge numbers of fans at college and other games are drunk. More weapons means a greater likelihood that a fracas results in a dead body. Would be a problem here, a greater problem in Europe with the soccer hooligans.

Noel: The specific case in front of the Supreme Court concerned handguns, held by law-abiding citizens. Not felons. Not machine-guns. No ouzies. No hand grenades. No tanks or nuclear weapons of any sort. Of course I agree that machine guns would be over kill - no pun intended. :)

Alison: Thanks for the kind words. I actually kind of like your rants -- the ones where you totally lose your temper and go into this slang/swearing/balls-to-the walls sort of Gonzo-ranting style. (seriously) Unique. I could never copy it if I tried.

Regarding Rush - if you ever listened to him you would know that he is far from stupid. And always interesting. Don't knock him until you've listened to him. There is a reason that the US Democrats would like to take him off the air. He's too persuasive.

Phantom: I agree that guns in planes is a very bad idea.

Regarding statistics - gun control and crime --- crime goes UP when law-abiding citizens are forbidden to self-defend with guns. Look it up.

Criminals don't obey laws - so gun control has no effect on their behavior.

It ain't rocket science, people.

Patty

I have looked this up, and shared it, in a sustained discussion here of some months ago. The safest -big- city in the US is New York City, and this has been the case for many years, even pre Giuliani.

New York City has very tight restrictions on possession of firearms. The only people allowed to have them are basically police, armed guards, and those who carry large amounts of cash ( the owner of a supermarket perhaps) No one else.

I could not get a pistol here even if I wanted one.

There is immense support for the gun laws here, among all racial/ethnic/income groups. No politician of note opposes them.

Here, if you are caught with an unlicensed gun, off to jail you go. It must have some effect, as our crime rate is lower than that of the big US cities where guns are easy to get, easy to keep, and easy to use, including when you're pissed off at the neighbor for whatever.

Don't believe me? Ask your Police Commissioner Bratton. Really- he would back me up on this.He is a great police leader, but one of the problems he faces in LA is the flood tide of guns--in NY that was not the case.

Oh dear , I do not like to burst bubbles of pre-conceptions but in Europe we can put our rifles and shotguns onto planes ( in the hold ) , we can take them on ferries , cars or coaches and go from the U.K. to all countries in the E.U. with our European Firearms Pass , I do it nearly every year .I enjoy hunting and target shooting , but have never felt the need or even the desire to shoot one of my fellows .
It is not permissible for me to defend myself in my home , with a firearm , but if the intruder was armed and I felt endangered then I can use one of my collection of English swords to remove that danger .

Don't think that we were talking about planes in the hold. You can check firearms onto any US plane, you just have to tell them you're doing it.

Phantom: That's not what I have read.

--When Michael Winner featured Charles Bronson in the film 'Death Wish', where an enraged husband takes vengeance on street muggers by shooting them, it became a box office smash both here and the US.--

I loved that movie myself. But the background to that movie ( and the various Dirty Harry movies, which I also like ) was a city/police force that is completely ineffective, where all rights are with the criminal, where the law is not enforced at all.

That is not the world that I live in, and probably not you either

---

Patty

You cannot check a loaded firearm. But you can check a rifle or pistol --presumably when it is legal to possess in both the city the journey begins and the city where it ends.

There is no such concept as God given rights. If you believe in God then all you can claim is that God gave you life and a free will. That's all. 'Rights' are a human legal and social product. You only have the right to bear arms if the lawful statutes of the state which you live in gives you those rights.

Thanks! Me too, i enjoy 'em. I like looking at all the personalities as they emerge on ATW. Plus ca change. I especially enjoy posting innocuous jokes about frogs legs and being accused of promoting cannabilism. That one's an ATW keeper.

You accept the notion of 'acceptable losses' to protect your second amendment God given or not Patty? By that I mean that innocent people will inevitably die for your right to bear arms? Just curious.

Phantom darlin', you're looking at this the wrong way. I'm betting any of the passengers riding the skies on 9/11 would have welcomed a nice sidearm snuggled inside some lady's purse. Same with the students on that university campus last year. Granted, those situations are thankfully rare, but a well-trained, licensed, registered gun owner could have spared a ton of grief on those horrible days.

It's not me (no, I don't carry but I could) or people like me you have to worry about, it's the criminals and lunatics, and you're never going to prevent them from getting their grubby paws on weapons and wreaking havoc.

I did forget something, here in Texas it is already illegal to carry a gun at all in venues where alcohol is sold - so the stadium scenario is already covered.

Just a thought, but do you think New York's low crime rate has more than a little something to do with the mayor deciding they were going to have a zero crime tolerance policy? I understand the police started enforcing all of the laws on the books, down to jaywalking and spitting on the sidewalks. Don't you think that situation created an environment that put the fear of prison into the criminal element?