View Single Post
Old August 11, 2012, 09:51 AM   #5
Frank Ettin
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 8,811
Originally Posted by jonbirdt
Originally Posted by Ninth Circuit
"The Second Amendment states: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." U.S. Const. amend. II. In Heller, the Supreme Court struck down the District of Columbia's ban on handgun possession, concluding that the Second Amendment "guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation."
United States v. Henry at 9040, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals August 9, 2012, No. 11-30181...
But note that this is all the Ninth Circuit said in Henry in that regard -- a mere mention in passing as dicta.

On the other hand, the Ninth Circuit held expressly (Henry at 9041) that machine guns are:
...highly “dangerous and unusual weapons” that are not “typically possessed by law abiding citizens for lawful purposes.” Heller, 554 U.S. at 625, 627. Thus, we hold that the Second Amendment does not apply to machine guns.....
And of course the Ninth Circuit in Henry also, predictably, supports an expansive reading of the Commerce Clause.

Originally Posted by jonbirdt
...They take as fact, and without exception that the 2A guarantees the right to carry in case of confrontation...
And it's quite possible that they do so in Henry simply because it has no bearing on that case.

We'd all love to see a clear statement from a federal court of appeal to that effect. But Henry gives me no particular comfort. Our best hope for a meaningful appellate court ruling in that regard remains Woollard.
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Page generated in 0.03779 seconds with 7 queries