ATTORNEYS LAW STUDENTS PUBLIC
TOP POSTS ALL POSTS SUBMIT POST
Share | Print | Report Post Second Amendment Chatboard


Hot Now...
• Attorney Chat Center
• Attorney Classifieds
• Attorney Chatboards
• Practice Areas
• Law Students
Most Popular
• Set Your Quick Links
• Chat Center
• All Chatboards
• Classified Ads

Re: Denied Illinois FOID card
Posted by Solo on 7/13/08

    It’s my understanding that the law, or the constitution did not change; the
    Supreme Court merely had to make those few people in America who did not
    understand it in the first place understand it a little better, so they made the
    writings of the constitution clearer for them to understand by basically
    repeating to them what the constitution has always read. Some people just don’t
    understand basic written laws; they have to always twist it around to make it
    difficult, when it was always clear that the people have the right to own
    firearms, that it was not just a privilege. The established government of that
    time tried to write the constitution as simple as they could, but there are
    always those few who just have a different prospective of the United
    Constitution then everyone else, and have to have it read over and over to
    understand it.

    On 7/07/08, friend of NRA wrote:
    > On 7/07/08, Greg Holz wrote:
    >> You may want to retract this statement after the Supreme Court's recent 2nd
    >> Amendment ruling! The Second Amendment not only applies to states but more
    >> importantly to an individuals right to keep and bear arms. It is very much
    >> about state gun control.
    >
    > No need for a retraction. What I wrote was the law at the time I wrote it.
    In
    > DC v. Heller the Supreme Court for the first time ever ruled that the 2nd
    > Amendment is an individual right. So that is now the law.
    >
    > However, DC v. Heller does not say that everyone can now own a gun or that
    > states may not reasonably place restrictions on gun ownership. FOID cards
    seem
    > to be well within the limits of the DC v. Heller decision. Don't expect for
    > FOID regulations to fall in a court challenge. Maybe the Chicago gun ban but
    > not FOID. We'll just have to wait and see how far DC v. Heller goes in
    > bringing down gun control laws.
    >
    > In any event, if you have a psyc or criminal history, the Supreme Court made
    it
    > clear in their opinion that you will not own a gun.
    >
    >
    >
    >> On 9/28/07, friend of NRA wrote:
    >>>> On 9/28/07, DILLER wrote in part:
    >>>
    >>>> Foid cards in my opinion violate the United States Constitution. You
    >>>> have a right to bare arms and shall not be infringed; it says nothing
    >>>> about firearm identification cards, or any other requirement. Stop them
    >>>> from dismantling the Constitution.
    >>>
    >>> The applicability of the Second Amendment is often misunderstood. Its
    >>> guarantee applies only to the federal government not to state government.
    >>> Over the years, much of the US Constitution has been made applicable to
    >>> the states by the terms of the 14th Amendment, but still, only certain
    >>> parts of it apply to states and the 2nd Amendment is one part that does
    >>> not apply to states. For example, the 5th Amendment is now applicable to
    >>> the states except for the part where it says "No person shall be held to
    >>> answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment
    >>> or indictment of a Grand Jury[.]" That part does not apply to the
    >>> states. The 5th Amendment has been applied to states piece by piece over
    >>> the last 150 years. Believe it or not, it was not until 1969 that the
    >>> double jeopardy clause of the 5th Amendment was applied to state trials by
    >>> the decision in Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784, and the self-
    >>> incrimination clause did not apply to state trials until the early
    >>> twentieth century. Likewise, the first sentence of the 7th Amendment
    >>> says "In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed
    >>> twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved[.]" That
    >>> does not apply to states. As I said above; none of the 2nd Amendment
    >>> applies to states. Don't confuse your federal US constitutional rights
    >>> with your rights under state law regarding firearms.
    >>>
    >>> I make no judgment about your opinion on gun control but want to point out
    >>> that the US Constitution does not forbid any type of gun control by the
    >>> states, thus, the Illinois FOID card can not be a violation of the 2nd
    >>> Amendment. The framers of the Constitution were concerned that the
    >>> federal government not take away the right to bear arms from the citizen
    >>> militias created by the states. They were not at all concerned at the
    >>> time the 2nd Amendment was written about state gun control. It is
    >>> unlikely that the Supreme Court will ever hold that the 2nd Amendment
    >>> applies to states.

     
     

 
Google
 
Web Counsel.Net
  Site Map: Home Search Legal Jobs Classifieds Law Students Contacts Practice Areas Advertise
  © 1996 - 2008. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.