PDA

View Full Version : Circuit Court: ‘Unsettled’ if 2nd Amendment Applies Outside of Home




Noob
08-06-2013, 10:05 AM
Another way they are going after guns.


In a case over New Jersey’s requirement that a citizen demonstrate “justifiable need” for a carrying a firearm before receiving a concealed carry license, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that such a requirement “does not burden conduct within the scope of the Second Amendment’s guarantee.” The court also said “it remains unsettled” whether the Second Amendment is even applicable outside one’s home.


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/05/Circuit-Court-Unsettled-Whether-Second-Amendment-Is-Applicable-Outside-Of-Home

asurfaholic
08-06-2013, 10:09 AM
When the NSA finally admits that the past decades have been spent spying on all Americans, including politicians and judges- will all court decisions be rolled back and deemed invalid due to outside pressure? It is pretty well considered that the NSA uses data for blackmail- this would render any judgement invalid if someone felt that they had to vote a certain way, or rule a certain way....

Czolgosz
08-06-2013, 10:10 AM
The irony of them ridding individuals of the natural right to defend themselves...without a shot being fired.

Noob
08-06-2013, 10:14 AM
Sorry about the title, did not notice the last part of it.

Kotin
08-06-2013, 10:35 AM
Sorry about the title, did not notice the last part of it.

Fixed it for ya :)

ZENemy
08-06-2013, 10:39 AM
Wow man, the 2nd amendment was VERY clear, they are trying to legislate away rights which they cannot do as our rights are natural and we are born with them. These people wont stop till all rights are gone, time to stand up people as these people cannot even read or follow their own laws when it does not suit them, its not going to change. Government as a concept is done, stick a fork in it.



"The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice." Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, at 24

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.

"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. US, 230 F 486, at 489.

"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights." Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946


We have a right to bare arms, "The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. US, 230 F 486, 489.

limequat
08-06-2013, 11:13 AM
"The court also said “it remains unsettled” whether the First Amendment is even applicable outside one’s home. "

I wonder how well the above version would fly.

Warrior_of_Freedom
08-06-2013, 12:15 PM
where on the 2nd amendment does it say keep and bear arms inside our closets inside 3 fingerprint scanning safes and with the guns and ammo in separate rooms?

ZENemy
08-06-2013, 12:24 PM
where on the 2nd amendment does it say keep and bear arms inside our closets inside 3 fingerprint scanning safes and with the guns and ammo in separate rooms?

It doesn't, and gun owners will have to start educating those that want to take them, on natural rights and the way they work.

Cabal
08-06-2013, 01:11 PM
"The court also said “it remains unsettled” whether enumerated rights are even applicable outside one’s home."

The State decides what table scraps of liberty it is in the mood to allow you.

brushfire
08-06-2013, 01:52 PM
If that is the case, that contradicts the 7th ruling in Moore/Shepard v Madigan. There's a split in the lower courts and this becomes a candidate for SCOTUS. Madigan (and a number of other anti-gun freaks) didnt want SCOTUS precedence, so they never appealed - instead they let IL legislators write a law allowing shall issue.

Contumacious
08-06-2013, 02:04 PM
Another way they are going after guns.


In a case over New Jersey’s requirement that a citizen demonstrate “justifiable need” for a carrying a firearm before receiving a concealed carry license, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that such a requirement “does not burden conduct within the scope of the Second Amendment’s guarantee.” The court also said “it remains unsettled” whether the Second Amendment is even applicable outside one’s home.

Corrupt' mo'fos.

They know very well it applies wherever an individual , who wants to stay alive, is.

.

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
08-06-2013, 02:20 PM
"The court also said “it remains unsettled” whether the First Amendment is even applicable outside one’s home. "

I wonder how well the above version would fly.


It flies fine. See you in the free speech zone.

Of course, they'd rather you communicate from within your home because it's easier for them to monitor and record.

aGameOfThrones
08-06-2013, 05:07 PM
My turn.

"The court also said “it remains unsettled” whether the 4th Amendment is even applicable anywhere. "

Cleaner44
08-06-2013, 05:47 PM
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Honorable Theodore A. McKee, Chief Judge
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/

Would it be correct to assume that Judge McKee is the incompetent and/or corrupt fool that can not read and understand the Constitution? If so... fire him.

DamianTV
08-06-2013, 06:35 PM
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Honorable Theodore A. McKee, Chief Judge
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/

Would it be correct to assume that Judge McKee is the incompetent and/or corrupt fool that can not read and understand the Constitution? If so... fire him.

Good luck. Unaccountable Authority knows NO Limits and respects NO Rights.

aGameOfThrones
08-06-2013, 06:39 PM
In a case over New Jersey’s requirement that a citizen demonstrate “justifiable need” for a carrying a firearm before receiving a concealed carry license,

Citizen: my area is a high risk for muggings

Chief "justice": have you personally been mugged?

Citizen: no, but...

Chief "justice": denied!

Citizen: it's to prevent being mugged...

Chief "justice": I have spoken!

shane77m
08-06-2013, 06:45 PM
This would probably be a good case for a large group of people to carry openly such as a march like the one that was supposed to happen in Washington on the 4th.

Easy for me to say though. Alabama has open and concealed carry. The only issue I would probably have is if my place of employment still prohibits firearms being on company property even after Alabama just passed a law saying people can keep a firearm in their vehicle.

Xenliad
08-06-2013, 07:00 PM
So slavery is okay if it's outside your home now?

DamianTV
08-06-2013, 07:04 PM
"The court also said “it remains unsettled” whether the First Amendment is even applicable outside one’s home. "

I wonder how well the above version would fly.

Right. So what happens when either the Bank owns someones home, or the person is Homeless? Are Rights (really Permissions) issued by the Bank, and Homeless have no Rights what so ever?

Carson
08-06-2013, 07:11 PM
If my constitutional rights are to only apply inside of my constitutional home should I be taxed for things outside of my constitutional realm.

paulbot24
08-06-2013, 07:12 PM
Right. So what happens when either the Bank owns someones home, or the person is Homeless? Are Rights (really Permissions) issued by the Bank, and Homeless have no Rights what so ever?

Now that is a scary thought. When the State tell you it is not "your" home, the Bank technically owns your home, so you will have to report your firearm ownership to the owner of your home, the bank, which forces you to buy an expensive add-on to your mortgage......buy hey, nobody's taking away your rights here, it is still your "choice......" It's a free country after all.

ObiRandKenobi
08-06-2013, 07:18 PM
we can't own guns but the police can have drones and tanks and machine guns and helicopters?

DamianTV
08-06-2013, 07:21 PM
we can't own guns but the police can have drones and tanks and machine guns and helicopters?

And Nukes and Enforcers and Surveillance and Prisons, and we soon wont be allowed to own a DOG.

nobody's_hero
08-06-2013, 09:00 PM
Citizen: my area is a high risk for muggings

Chief "justice": have you personally been mugged?

Citizen: no, but...

Chief "justice": denied!

Citizen: it's to prevent being mugged...

Chief "justice": I have spoken!

Continued:

Citizen eventually does mugged and dies.

Chief "justice": we need more gun control.

presence
08-06-2013, 09:04 PM
http://www.skolaiimages.com/stock/albums/eagles/baldeagle_a_037.jpg

In a free country my talons come with me.