The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

mack59 · July 1, 2010, 03:24 PM

No, I don't get where you get what you are trying to claim others are claiming here. People are merely saying that the right to keep and bears arms is as legally binding on the states as it is on the federal government - like the first amendment and the right to free speech or the right to worship.

The point being that the minority opinions wanted to water down the second amendment if it was applied to the states (so that states could ban handguns or assualt rifles or high capacity magazines) - though they didn't want it applied at all - since they really disagreed with it even being or protecting an individual right to keep and bear arms.

Regarding the bearing of arms - the court seems inclined from the information they include in their decision to allow states to individually define how, where, or under what circumstances the carrying or bearing of arms would occur within the limitations of the right - so long as it does not violate the fundamental right protected - i.e. a state could require open carry or ccw - or it could require open carry in some circumstances and ccw in others - so long as people could exercise their RKBA. One state might ban carry in sensitive places such as schools or governement buildings another state might not. One state might have a shall issue license (so long as it did not unduly burden or interfer with the free exercise of the right), another state might have no license. But all such laws would have to exist within the defined right of individuals to keep and bear arms. Thus no state could ban handguns, no state could ban the bearing or carrying of arms, no state could impose draconian restrictions on keeping or bearing arms.

The Illinois constitution has a right to keep and bear arms in it, but it also has the added phrase, as subject to police powers. The Illinois courts have ruled that because of that all and any gun control laws are legal in Illinois. Because of McDonald that will no longer be the case - police powers will no longer trump the fundamental individual right to keep and bear arms and will be subject to standards of scrutiny as identified by the federal courts.

July 1, 2010, 03:24 PM	#113
mack59 Senior Member Join Date: July 14, 2004 Posts: 447	No, I don't get where you get what you are trying to claim others are claiming here. People are merely saying that the right to keep and bears arms is as legally binding on the states as it is on the federal government - like the first amendment and the right to free speech or the right to worship. The point being that the minority opinions wanted to water down the second amendment if it was applied to the states (so that states could ban handguns or assualt rifles or high capacity magazines) - though they didn't want it applied at all - since they really disagreed with it even being or protecting an individual right to keep and bear arms. Regarding the bearing of arms - the court seems inclined from the information they include in their decision to allow states to individually define how, where, or under what circumstances the carrying or bearing of arms would occur within the limitations of the right - so long as it does not violate the fundamental right protected - i.e. a state could require open carry or ccw - or it could require open carry in some circumstances and ccw in others - so long as people could exercise their RKBA. One state might ban carry in sensitive places such as schools or governement buildings another state might not. One state might have a shall issue license (so long as it did not unduly burden or interfer with the free exercise of the right), another state might have no license. But all such laws would have to exist within the defined right of individuals to keep and bear arms. Thus no state could ban handguns, no state could ban the bearing or carrying of arms, no state could impose draconian restrictions on keeping or bearing arms. The Illinois constitution has a right to keep and bear arms in it, but it also has the added phrase, as subject to police powers. The Illinois courts have ruled that because of that all and any gun control laws are legal in Illinois. Because of McDonald that will no longer be the case - police powers will no longer trump the fundamental individual right to keep and bear arms and will be subject to standards of scrutiny as identified by the federal courts.