2nd Amendment Rights & The Supreme Court

[rdrader2002]

Hey y'all - Did y'all know that another case is headed to the U.S. Supreme Court over our 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bear arms? For those that are in the NRA, y'all can read about it in October issue of The American Rifleman.

This case came out of Wash D.C. when some folks there didn't like getting like some of the local laws concerning handguns and how to keep weapons stored in your home. Here's a couple of examples -
#1 it's illegal to keep any weapon unless trigger locked or broken down, &
#2 it's only legal to discharge a weapon if it's for recreational purposes (it's illegal to shoot someone in self defense)

Needless to say, the court of appeals tossed out the codes (laws) there in D.C., so D.C. appealed the verdict up to the Supreme Court.

Just thought y'all might want to know.

RR

[savageshooter]

the day those liberals try to take away my weopons rights, is the day of the second cival war!
so with all this crap, how long do you think it will before they attack muzzleloaders and bows??

[BruceBruce1959]

The United States Constitution will always be challenged by someone, somewhere, somehow.

I think the 1st Article in the Vermont Constitution Is why I love Vermont

Hunting is Vermonts oldest tradition.


CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF VERMONT

A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE
STATE OF VERMONT


Art. 1st
That all men are born equally free and independent, and have
certain natural, inherent, and unalienable rights, amongst
which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty, ac-
quiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing
and obtaining happiness and safety; therefore no person born
in this country, or brought from over sea, ought to be hold-
en by law, to serve any person as a servant, slave or ap-
prentice, after he arrives to the age of twenty-one years,
unless he is bound by his own consent, after he arrives to
such age, or bound by law for the payment of debts, damages,
fines, costs, or the like.


Article 16. [Right to bear arms; standing armies; military power subordinate to civil]

That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the
State--and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought
not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to
and governed by the civil power.



I can go on and on about how or Why other states should observe and notice Vermonts State Hunting laws.

As recent as Oct. 29th 2007 the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources had a Press Release titled,
"Hunting is Safe and getting Safer in Vermont" < Click to View

Happy Hunting Ya'll !!!

[critter gitter]

I still think it is a privelage to own and shoot firearms.

[timberghost]

I have a little college and experience in the criminal justice field and if I can remember right it's only legal in self defense when a weapon of equal or greater potential is displayed and that the aggressor is advancing in a life threatening manner. But if the aggressor is retreating and is no longer a risk you cannot shoot especially if his back is towards you in an attempt to get away. There was a criminal court case that was going on up here a while ago that was pretty disturbing, check this out. An armed robber went into a Wilson Farms 24hr store and had the cashier and a couple customers held at gun point when he was distracted and the cashier took the opportunity to take the gun away from the gunman. As the gunman fled the store the cashier shot at him several times. The robber survived but that's just the beginning. The cashier was charged with wreckless endangerment, unlawfully discharging a firearm, and the biggest charge was attempted murder because the robber was fleeing in an unthreatening manner. The customers and the community deemed the cashier a local hero and held rallies and stuff to get this kid off the hook. But I think that he did get lesser charges or something but it's a shame how these laws can backfire on the good people. Oh yeah, the gunman was only charged with "attempted armed robbery".

[BruceBruce1959]

I'm not a lawyer but I do know many who practice and Some that need more practice.... And I guess all I can say about that particular situation is that where ever this took place, it's in an area where the persons called "State Prosecutors" are nothing more than gutless, spineless, heartless cowards who think Criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens but then again the same area has people called Defense attorneys that apparently don't have family jewels any larger than those worn by Fruit Flies.

I'm willing to train store owners/clerks & cashiers how to Aim better at store Robbers so they don't waste good ammunition on missed shots.

someone has to protect the innocent, and in that area Obviously the Police and the courts didn't.....

[savageshooter]

Good posting!!

you couldnt have put it better man, im pretty sure if someone attacked, tryed to hurt, or molested anyone in my family, no law would save them

[buckfever]

Interesting.. Rdrader that example #2 really gets me. If we have no right to self defense what right do we have? It would seem if that law was passed and enforced the armed citizen would be basically useless. Im an American. Just like 99% of our judges and lawyers. I cannot understand how an American judge and or jury can find a law abiding citizen guilty of self defense.

For example. An armed robber,rapist or whatever breaks into my house. he notices a 12 gauge pump pointed at his forehead and starts firing in my house. Could a jury convict me of murder for trying to protect my family. I would certainly hope not. But in todays messed up, non God fearing society you never really know.

Timberghost, I would have been one of those in your town taking up for the cashier. I have never been in that situation and can't say how i would react from experience but we all know.... #1 the guy was scared. He just got done wrestling with an armed robber to take his gun. #2 He felt threatened by the guy he shot at. Also the same man that just had a gun to his head. #3 Who knows if the armed robber was going back to his vehicle to get another gun. Alot of folks would have done the same thing. Maybe myself included. I think that has to be looked at as self defense.

Some days i wish i was a judge. Just so their would be one more out there that cracked down on the crack heads, murders, rapist and all the other dirt that do not deserve freedom. If we had laws like we used to have there would be alot less crime and turmoil. Think about in the old days. You murder someone and your hung from the town square. With that law we would not have these repeat offenders. You steal something with your hands and get your hands cut off. With that law you dont have worry about them stealing anything else. I could go on and on with this so i will shut-up. One last thing though. If murderers were treated the same way they treated their victims our taxes would be lower. I am tired of supporting the low lifes.

[timberghost]

I always liked the idea of sentencing a murderer to die the same we he killed his victim or victims. If he raped, beat, then strangled his victim then do the same to him (I wouldn't know about the first part but beating and strangling the criminal to death would be a suitable punishment.) Like Buckfevers view about murdering and stealing, I agree with EQUAL PUNISHMENT. Hey Buck, when you run for Town Justice you'll definitely have my vote.