McDonald v. City Of Chicago

Transcript of today's proceeding before the SCOTUS -- long but a worthy read.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-1521.pdf

I have been watching this.. It is a good debate.. I guess it comes down to does the 2nd Amendment trump State's rights.. I have always been a State right person, but when it comes to the amendments like the 1st or 2nd I think they are to important to have the States to have different rulings on..Going to get real interesting..

if the states can determine whether or when or how the 2nd amendment is in effect within their borders, then they can also do the same thing with all the other rights in the constitution.
This is stupid! The Constitution is for all the citizens of the US in whichever state they live in.

sunny225 wrote:if the states can determine whether or when or how the 2nd amendment is in effect within their borders, then they can also do the same thing with all the other rights in the constitution.
This is stupid! The Constitution is for all the citizens of the US in whichever state they live in.

... even the right to free speech -- it would make the Bill of Rights worthless!!

captain-03 wrote:

sunny225 wrote:if the states can determine whether or when or how the 2nd amendment is in effect within their borders, then they can also do the same thing with all the other rights in the constitution.
This is stupid! The Constitution is for all the citizens of the US in whichever state they live in.

... even the right to free speech -- it would make the Bill of Rights worthless!!

I believe that things like Capital Punishment, health care, abortion, gay marriage, etc, should be left up to the States to decide, but I think your right on the Bill of Rights they should not be left up to the States.. But I think the debate in this case is which laws are up to the States and which ones are not.. That is the part that will be interesting to watch..

righttoown wrote:Should not even be an issue sent the Supreme Court ruled on in the Washington case!

But the difference is thate Washington DC is a federal territory and not part of any State.. So there are no States rigths that apply to the city...If Mcdonald wins this case (and I hope he does) it will be a huge precedent on other gun laws....And IMO even bigger than the DC Case..

cwink wrote:

righttoown wrote:Should not even be an issue sent the Supreme Court ruled on in the Washington case!

But the difference is thate Washington DC is a federal territory and not part of any State.. So there are no States rigths that apply to the city...If Mcdonald wins this case (and I hope he does) it will be a huge precedent on other gun laws....And IMO even bigger than the DC Case..

I, too, believe it will be much bigger than the Heller case!