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

Wrenn -vs- DC (Gun Control Case)

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by RicInOR, Oct 23, 2015.

  1. RicInOR

    RicInOR Washington County Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,903
    Likes Received:
    4,715
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...e_turns_on_english_laws_of_1328_and_1689.html


    "... medieval English laws matter in legal debates about gun control in the United States today. The Supreme Court’s landmark 2008 Second Amendment decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, determined that sufficiently “long-standing” firearms regulations are constitutional. This means that in Second Amendment cases, we have to get our English history right.

    Doing so is crucial in a gun case now before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals: Wrenn v. D.C. The case is critical for Washington residents but also more broadly as the pro-gun lobby challenges laws in cities across the country. The District of Columbia argues that English and American law has always permitted restrictions on the right to carry guns in populated public places, tracing this tradition to the 1328 Statute of Northampton, which generally prohibited carrying guns in public. The District argues that the Second Amendment and its English precursors did not allow unfettered public carrying in densely populated cities, and thus the District may restrict it.

    A group of legal historians has disputed this interpretation in an amicus brief filed this month, followed by an essay in the Washington Post by David Kopel, adjunct professor at Denver University’s law school. They claim the English Bill of Rights of 1689 superseded the 1328 statute and that, “There was a lot of weapons-carrying in England.” Thus, they conclude, D.C. residents have the right to carry guns in public. But their English history is wrong, as are their conclusions about public carry in the nation’s capital. "


    " 1688–89 ... , including a provision guaranteeing Protestants (but not Catholics or Jews) the right to bear arms. "

    " By all means, let us learn from this English past: It did not include the unqualified right of an individual to carry arms in public."

    "Priya Satia is a professor of British history at Stanford University."



    More:
    https://goo.gl/1RvWFs

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...f-on-history-of-right-to-carry-in-wrenn-v-dc/
     
  2. Caveman Jim

    Caveman Jim West of Oly Springer Slayer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    8,946
    I could care less about the British, they are the filth that True American Patriots kicked out. Their political differences have no worth here except for the progressive liberals that embrace the "keep them down" mentality of days before our independence!!!
    If anyone here votes for these snakes then they are "OUR ENEMY"!!!!:mad::mad::mad:
     
    BoonDocks36, hker71, RLS and 3 others like this.
  3. Slobray

    Slobray Yelm, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    801
    Likes Received:
    1,553
    British law before the Constitution was adopted has no legal standing. Therefore the DC's argument is null and void and should be thown out.


    Ray
     
  4. Mark W.

    Mark W. Silverton, OR Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    5,776
    Likes Received:
    4,965
    "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" seams pretty brain dead simple to me!
     
  5. albin25

    albin25 Lewiston Idaho Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,223
    Likes Received:
    4,084
    I guess that means there must be a legal basis in British law for an American government approved church too...
    ...We can call it the Amerglican church and require all schools to teach it.

    The way things are going I may need to add a few extra rooms for troops to be billeted in my home....(don't tell anyone if you hear me complain about it...I could get hung!)
     
    Slobray likes this.
  6. Dyjital

    Dyjital Albany, Ore Flavorite Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    4,902
    Likes Received:
    5,853
    Aye, but the term "well regulated" has them all bound up.

    The same people who think "gay" has always meant homosexual.

    Hell I was flipping through movies last night on Amazon and saw "the Gay Cowboy". Purdy sure they weren't referring to a brokeback style movie. I guess alternate meanings are lost to time.
     
    Slobray likes this.
  7. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler wa Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    603
    Likes Received:
    685
    How about this. I won't bring my guns into the densely populated cities if those living in these same gun free zone cities promise not to bring their guns outside the city limits of whatever Never-neverland they came from?
     
    41Slinger likes this.
  8. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler wa Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    603
    Likes Received:
    685
    Unless you attended one of our many institutions of radical learnings... where history and language are what you want it to be. :rolleyes:

    Obama at Harvard.jpg
     
    Slobray likes this.
  9. 41Slinger

    41Slinger Harrisburg Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    749
    Likes Received:
    1,269
    Hmmmmm, I wonder who paid for this, there's just no opportunity in this darned old county, guess we need to CHANGE that.
    THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is my law, screw British law. Not that I have a opinion or anything.
     
    freestoneangler and Slobray like this.