Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Knight0334
Bear does mean carry, but if you look at the 2008 Heller ruling, they only protected carrying within one's home. Which then the McDonald ruling somewhat affirmed that, but carrying that over to the states.
|
Not really.
What
Heller actually said was that "the" right enumerated in the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, not a collective right. And what
McDonald said was that "the" individual right affirmed in
Heller is binding on the fifty states.
"The" right. ONE right. It is a dual-purpose right, to "keep" and to "bear" arms. But ... it is ONE right.
Heller spoke primarily about guns in the home because that was the basis on which Heller
et al challenged the DC gun ban. But the language of the 2nd Amendment itself is crystal clear that there is only ONE right being discussed, and that it is a right to "keep and bear" (not "a right to keep or a right to bear") arms.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by drjjpdc
As Mack and fiddle have admirably stated it's a good day. Chicago's gun laws will not be instantly overturned. But as soon as a case comes up (trust me very quickly) the lower court will have to rule again, but with the new Supreme Court guidelines which is now precedent. And then we will win that battle.
|
Chicago doesn't have to wait for a case. They have one:
McDonald. The case is still very much alive. The SCOTUS decision ruled that the lower court decision was wrong, and they remanded the case. That means it goes back down to the lower court, which has to reconsider it on the basis of the new SCOTUS ruling that the 2A applies against the states.