Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles
Title: SCOTUS Refuses to Hear Major Gun Rights Case, Clarence Thomas Files Sharp Dissent
Source:
Reason magazine
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jun 22, 2015
Author: Damon Root
Post Date: 2015-06-22 22:24:13 by tpaine
Keywords: None
Views: 12980
Comments: 60
SCOTUS Refuses to Hear Major Gun Rights Case, Clarence Thomas Files Sharp Dissent Petition denied in Jackson v. San Francisco. The U.S. Supreme Court dealt Second Amendment supporters a major defeat today by refusing to hear an appeal filed by San Francisco gun owners seeking to overturn that city's requirement that all handguns kept at home and not carried on the owner’s person be "stored in a locked container or disabled with a trigger lock." Today’s action by the Court leaves that gun control ordinance on the books. If the facts of the San Francisco case sound familiar it is because they correspond so closely to the facts at issue in the Supreme Court's 2008 ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller. In that decision, the Court voided not only D.C.'s ban on handguns, it also voided D.C.'s requirement that all firearms kept at home be "unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device." According to Heller, the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to keep a "lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense." In other words, the San Francisco gun control law would appear to be plainly unconstitutional under Heller. Yet the Court still refused to hear the case. As is customary, the justices gave no explanation for their denial of the appeal. Two justices, however, did speak out in opposition to the Court's refusal to get involved. Writing in dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Antonin Scalia, accused his colleagues of undermining Heller and failing to give the Second Amendment its constitutional due. Here's a portion of Thomas' dissent: Less than a decade ago, we explained that an ordinance requiring firearms in the home to be kept inoperable, without an exception for self-defense, conflicted with the Second Amendment because it “ma[de] it impossible for citizens to use [their firearms] for the core lawful purpose of self- defense.” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570, 630 (2008). Despite the clarity with which we described the Second Amendment’s core protection for the right of self-defense, lower courts, including the ones here, have failed to protect it. Because Second Amendment rights are no less protected by our Constitution than other rights enumerated in that document, I would have granted this petition. The case is Jackson v. San Francisco. Justice Thomas' dissent from denial of certiorari is available here. Damon Root is a senior editor of Reason magazine
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 10.
#1. To: tpaine (#0)
Both nominated by (R)'s. Bush and Reagan. I thought you said Kookifornia was soon to be improving? Willingly and intentionally are the way you like your tyranny served. Here in Pa, we don't have to leave out handguns home or have to have a permit or license to carry them.
There are indications that the big govt socialistic kooks like you are bankrupting the State. (And the USA, of course) --- I predict it'll happen soon. Silly comment, seeing that I'm against big govt tyranny, unlike you and your buddies here. You and your group here [especially misterwhite], have always accepted the concept that local and State govts can write 'laws' that infringe on our gun rights. -- Now you're changing your tune?
Then why live in a state you have to beg to own a handgun? Not so silly... you don't have half the patriotic principles I have... or you'd move away from everybody you've ever known just to avoid paying taxes toward your own nazi gun laws... LIKE I DID. I gotta say... It was tough just yesterday. On Father's Day. Yesterday was the first time since my father died in 06 that I didn't drive to his grave site on Father's Day and tell him happy Father's Day... but I'm kinda far away now. New York caused me yesterdays hardship. I hope Cuck Fuomo dies a horrible illness.
Silly comment, seeing that I'm against big govt tyranny, unlike you and your buddies here. You and your group here [especially misterwhite], have always accepted the concept that local and State govts can write 'laws' that infringe on our gun rights. -- Now you're changing your tune? You really are a silly boy. I've been selling and giving away my gun collection for years, but I still own over 20 handguns (and occasionally buy another), and have never begged anyone for any of them. From how you've described your law enforcement career, I'd bet that you moved away from everyone you've known out of fear of retribution, now that you've lost the badge. --- Good guess?
You say a lot of ignorant shit to avoid why you willingly lick the boots of Kookifornia. You are a joke. Why won't you move, tpaine? Why do you WILLINGLY live by ball and chain? Arizona is just one state away. Are you really a constitution lover? You are all talk and NO ACTION.
From how you've described your law enforcement career, I'd bet that you moved away from everyone you've known out of fear of retribution, now that you've lost the badge. --- Good guess? Rave on kiddo. Actually I don't believe any of your stories. You're probably some cop wannabe, posting from your mother's basement.
I really don't give a shit what you believe about me. It's not about me. It's about YOU. You do believe you live in Kookifornia, don't you? WHY? If you loath tyranny, and there are MANY states with low taxes and no gun restrictions, why stay in Kookifornia? You are a statist, aren't ya? You must enjoy it. Are you incarcerated and you can't leave?
Rave on kiddo. Actually I don't believe any of your stories. You're probably some cop wannabe, posting from your mother's basement. Born in Minnesota, moved out to the bay area in '58 after the army, raised a family, and now retired to the mountains. Family, friends, -- and the fact that most areas of the state are not 'kookie' at all. -- I live in Plumas County, a little slice of heaven, with mostly good people. I'm a constitutionalist. -- It's a hell of a good system. -- You should try to understand it someday. I'm a retired building contractor, enjoying my new toy, a polaris slingshot. I'm planning to leave tomorrow for a few days ride in Nevada. -- If I drive too fast, I might wind up incarcerated...
#11. To: tpaine (#10)
We live and die by the choices we make. I can respect your choice to stay... but don't ever question my hatred for big brother because I was a cop... I've done what you refuse to do. End of our debate.
Hadn't heard of them yet. Slick wheels. The appeal of a Can-Am roadster in a reverse-trike configuration but with a more consumer-friendly profile and side-by-side seating. The weight is mostly forward, over the front axles with the passenger weight being low-slung, leaving a 3-wheel configuration that should not be prone to roll-overs. In fact, it might be a little safer overall than the Can-Am motortrikes. Some of the styling reminds me a bit of these modern Batman movies. It should be a delightful urban runabout, especially in sunny places like CA.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestTwo justices, however, did speak out in opposition to the Court's refusal to get involved. Writing in dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Antonin Scalia, accused his colleagues of undermining Heller and failing to give the Second Amendment its constitutional due. Here's a portion of Thomas' dissent:
#4. To: GrandIsland, gatlin, misterwhite, Y'ALL (#1)
I thought you said Kookifornia was soon to be improving?
Willingly and intentionally are the way you like your tyranny served.
Here in Pa, we don't have to leave out handguns home or have to have a permit or license to carry them.
#5. To: tpaine (#4)
(Edited)
Silly comment, seeing that I'm against big govt tyranny
#6. To: GrandIsland (#5)
Willingly and intentionally are the way you like your tyranny served.
Then why live in a state you have to beg to own a handgun?
Not so silly... you don't have half the patriotic principles I have... it you'd move away from everybody you've ever known just to avoid paying taxes toward your own nazi gun laws... LIKE I DID.
#7. To: tpaine (#6)
(Edited)
From how you've described your law enforcement career, I'd bet that you moved away from everyone you've known out of fear of retribution, now that you've lost the badge
#8. To: GrandIsland (#7)
--- it you'd move away from everybody you've ever known just to avoid paying taxes toward your own nazi gun laws... LIKE I DID.
You say a lot of ignorant shit to avoid why you willingly lick the boots of Kookifornia.
#9. To: tpaine (#8)
(Edited)
Rave on kiddo. Actually I don't believe any of your stories. You're probably some cop wannabe, posting from your mother's basement.
#10. To: GrandIsland (#9)
I really don't give a shit what you believe about me. It's not about me. It's about YOU. You do believe you live in Kookifornia, don't you?
WHY? If you loath tyranny, and there are MANY states with low taxes and no gun restrictions, why stay in Kookifornia?
You are a statist, aren't ya?
You must enjoy it. Are you incarcerated and you can't leave?
Replies to Comment # 10. Family, friends, -- and the fact that most areas of the state are not 'kookie' at all. -- I live in Plumas County, a little slice of heaven, with mostly good people.
#15. To: tpaine, GrandIsland (#10)
End Trace Mode for Comment # 10.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]