Important Supreme Court decisions concerning guns

Mr. Perfect

Listed below are links to the decisions of some of the more important United States Supreme Court decisions that concern firearms ownership and use. If you wish to see a case added, comment on this thread and I will include it below.


Here is a link to United States v. Miller:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17128640835628801970&hl=en&as_sdt=6,48&as_vis=1


Here is a link to District of Columbia v. Heller:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6484080926445491577&q=District+of+Columbia+v.+Heller&hl=en&as_sdt=6,48&as_vis=1


Here is a link to McDonald v. City of Chicago:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10450488700560329027&q=McDonald+v.+City+of+Chicago&hl=en&as_sdt=6,48&as_vis=1


Here is a link to NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION,
INC., ET AL. v. BRUEN
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

serf

There are two dead links on these rulings here however two of them listed ruled on handguns and a short barrel shotguns but not assault military rifles. Then the third ruling by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia left the assault rifle definition hanging in the balance,so it's not rather assuring that these rulings would protect all firearms. Especially if A state banned assault weapons and it was appealed to the Supreme court for a ruling if States could allow it to regulate them.

serf

ttps://www.newsweek.com/antonin-scalia-ronald-reagan-supreme-court-orlando-shooting-newtown-sandy-hook-472460

The issue that Scalia left future courts to grapple with is what constitutes a protected weapon. He wrote that the Constitution protects weapons that could be carried and were in common use. What he didn't say in the opinion?and what the court has deferred ruling on?is whether an AR-15 fits the bill for a common weapon. On one hand, it's certainly not rare. There are more than a million in circulation. On the other hand, it's not as ubiquitous as ordinary rifles and handguns. At some point, the John Roberts court will wrestle with the questions Scalia left unanswered, or the justices will leave it to the political process.

Mr. Perfect

serf wrote:

There are two dead links on these rulings here however two of them listed ruled on handguns and a short barrel shotguns but not assault military rifles. Then the third ruling by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia left the assault rifle definition hanging in the balance,so it's not rather assuring that these rulings would protect all firearms. Especially if A state banned assault weapons and it was appealed to the Supreme court for a ruling if States could allow it to regulate them.

serf

ttps://www.newsweek.com/antonin-scalia-ronald-reagan-supreme-court-orlando-shooting-newtown-sandy-hook-472460

The issue that Scalia left future courts to grapple with is what constitutes a protected weapon. He wrote that the Constitution protects weapons that could be carried and were in common use. What he didn't say in the opinion?and what the court has deferred ruling on?is whether an AR-15 fits the bill for a common weapon. On one hand, it's certainly not rare. There are more than a million in circulation. On the other hand, it's not as ubiquitous as ordinary rifles and handguns. At some point, the John Roberts court will wrestle with the questions Scalia left unanswered, or the justices will leave it to the political process.

Links are fixed now.

brier-49

The biggest if on these ruling is that the SCOTUS does not make law.They rule on if a law is Constitutional. There is no interpreting as the Constitution is written in plain English.
All these rulings are overstepping by SCOTUS by putting restrictions on "Shall not be Infringed"
We need a good old fashioned Revolution. Or at least a million+ gun owners march on every state capitol & DC

serf

brier-49 wrote:

The biggest if on these ruling is that the SCOTUS does not make law.They rule on if a law is Constitutional. There is no interpreting as the Constitution is written in plain English.
All these rulings are overstepping by SCOTUS by putting restrictions on "Shall not be Infringed"
We need a good old fashioned Revolution. Or at least a million+ gun owners march on every state capitol & DC

Well Scalia's ruling said that the weapons that were common and could be carried. Now every word written on his ruling affects future rulings,then the word (were) means a carried weapon in the 1700's? Or a common weapon in today's National Guard? This is where (they) The Judiciary can play word games and rule either way and say they made a ruling on what was meant by our Fore Fathers thoughts at the time of it's making.

Be wise a serpent and gentle as a dove. But Don't get bitten or snarled in a net however!

serf
The past tense is a grammatical tense whose function is to place an action or situation in past time

chiefr

DEMOCRATs stomp and crap on the US CONS.

Unconstitutional bans on gun and ammo sales have already been implemented in cities they control and in states with DEMOCRAT control. More are a certainty

Wonder which DEMOCRAT state will be the first for a statewide ban.

Mr. Perfect

chiefr said:

DEMOCRATs stomp and crap on the US CONS.

Unconstitutional bans on gun and ammo sales have already been implemented in cities they control and in states with DEMOCRAT control. More are a certainty

Wonder which DEMOCRAT state will be the first for a statewide ban.

If you're paying attention the Republicans are just as bad or worse.

Horse Plains Drifter

Mr. Perfect said:

chiefr said:

DEMOCRATs stomp and crap on the US CONS.

Unconstitutional bans on gun and ammo sales have already been implemented in cities they control and in states with DEMOCRAT control. More are a certainty

Wonder which DEMOCRAT state will be the first for a statewide ban.

If you're paying attention the Republicans are just as bad or worse.

Yes, the people wearing blinders continue to amaze me. Using the shredded constitution for toilet paper knows no party lines.