Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAn Opening for States to Restrict Guns
To listen to the insistent harangues of many gun-rights advocates, one might imagine that the Second Amendment prohibits almost any regulation of firearms.
Fortunately, a majority of the Supreme Court disagrees. On Monday, the court declined to hear a challenge to a Chicago suburbs law banning semiautomatic assault weapons and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
The town of Highland Park, Ill., passed the 2013 ordinance, which bans categories of weapons as well as specific guns by name, including the AR-15 and the AK-47, in the wake of the massacre of 26 children and educators at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn. The shooter in that attack, like those in many mass shootings, used a semiautomatic assault rifle with a high-capacity magazine.
It was the 70th time since 2008 that the Supreme Court has declined to consider a lawsuit challenging a federal, state or local gun regulation. This creates a big opportunity for Americans to put pressure on their state and local leaders, especially since Congress refuses to approve even uncontroversial measures like universal background checks for gun sales, which are supported by nearly nine in 10 Americans. Until that changes, states and cities have the constitutional authority and moral obligation to protect the public from the scourge of gun violence.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/opinion/an-opening-for-states-to-restrict-guns.html
Fortunately, a majority of the Supreme Court disagrees. On Monday, the court declined to hear a challenge to a Chicago suburbs law banning semiautomatic assault weapons and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
The town of Highland Park, Ill., passed the 2013 ordinance, which bans categories of weapons as well as specific guns by name, including the AR-15 and the AK-47, in the wake of the massacre of 26 children and educators at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn. The shooter in that attack, like those in many mass shootings, used a semiautomatic assault rifle with a high-capacity magazine.
It was the 70th time since 2008 that the Supreme Court has declined to consider a lawsuit challenging a federal, state or local gun regulation. This creates a big opportunity for Americans to put pressure on their state and local leaders, especially since Congress refuses to approve even uncontroversial measures like universal background checks for gun sales, which are supported by nearly nine in 10 Americans. Until that changes, states and cities have the constitutional authority and moral obligation to protect the public from the scourge of gun violence.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/opinion/an-opening-for-states-to-restrict-guns.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 880 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
An Opening for States to Restrict Guns (Original Post)
SecularMotion
Dec 2015
OP
hack89
(39,171 posts)1. States have always had the ability
for the most case they decided to liberalize their gun laws instead.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)2. States have a lot of ability to regulate.
The feds are about at the end of the line. Most suggestions hereabouts are about federal asked-and-answered impossibilities, not about states.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)3. so nothings changed
They have always been able to do that.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)4. Now that we know Heller/McDonald mean little, except gun yahoos can keep a gun IN THEIR HOME,
time to see more Highland Parks, NYC, etc.
Hopefully, people in the states will have the sense to elect candidates with a loyalty to society, not yahoos who are arming up as if we are in a war zone or have the view of minorities of a Donald Trump.
ileus
(15,396 posts)5. Hopefully the people will let the state know who is the boss.
Doc_Technical
(3,527 posts)6. I have nothing against civilians owning semi-auto weapons,
but I am opposed to civilians possessing them.
These weapons should be stored in an armory where their owners
have access to them and may fire and clean them there but cannot
take them home with them.