Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

The Brady Bunch's Spin on McDonald Decision

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Cougfan2, Jun 28, 2010.

  1. Cougfan2

    Cougfan2 Hillsboro, OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,792
    Likes Received:
    597
    I love how the Brady Bunch is now trying to spin the McDonald Decision as some sort of win for gun control. :laugh:

    In its decision in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed its language in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment individual right to possess guns in the home for self-defense does not prevent elected representatives from enacting common-sense gun laws to protect communities from gun violence.



    The Court has rejected the gun lobby argument that its ‘any gun, for anybody, anywhere’ agenda is protected by the Constitution. The Court again recognized that the Second Amendment allows for reasonable restrictions on firearms, including who can have them and under what conditions, where they can be taken, and what types of firearms are permissible.



    The Brady Center, joined by several national law enforcement groups, filed a friend of the court brief urging the Court to interpret the Second Amendment to allow for “reasonable” gun laws.

    In McDonald v. City of Chicago, the Court determined that the Second Amendment applies to state and local laws.
     
  2. Hawaiian

    Hawaiian Tigard Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    I think most of us would agree with reasonable regulation. No, the guy that can not control his temper and beats his wife kids should not own a gun. I happen to agree with the domestic violence restriction. And no, a convicted murderer or gang banger released on parole should not own a gun.

    The problem is that the Brady Bunch and I do not agree on what constitutes reasonable regulation. They will say that restricting any weapon other than a slingshot is reasonable. And limit the rubber bands on it to no more that two inches.
     
  3. Cougfan2

    Cougfan2 Hillsboro, OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,792
    Likes Received:
    597
    +1 It's all in the definition of reasonable and for the Brady Bunch reasonable means no guns for anyone other than LEO or military.
     
  4. Karma

    Karma the woods in Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    486
    Likes Received:
    72
    I agree in reasonable restrictions on gun ownership. I just seem to have a different idea of what constitutes a reasonable restriction.

    I believe the only reasonable restriction is on the person, not the firearm. In other words, I believe that a person convicted of a legitimate felony by a court of law should lose the right to own firearms, unless that right is reinstated. I do not believe the restriction of any weapon to a law abiding citizen is "reasonable".
     
  5. Redcap

    Redcap Lewis County, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    2,731

    I can agree with this. :thumbup: