More Fantastic 2nd Amendment News
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 5:26 pm
The Illinois Supreme Court tore down more restrictions on law abiding citizens...after the citizens revolt in Colorado on Tuesday, and now this...maybe there is hope for freedom loving people...
"* The Illinois Supreme Court has issued two gun-control rulings that are undoubtedly bringing great cheer to the NRA.
In the first, People v. Aguilar, a person was arrested in his own friend’s Chicago yard because he was holding a pistol. The Supremes cited the Heller decision and the 7th US Circuit’s recent landmark public carry decision (Moore v. Madigan) to knock down the arrest as unconstitutional…
if Heller means what it says, and “individual self-defense” is indeed “the central component” of the second amendment right to keep and bear arms (Heller, 554 U.S. at 599), then it would make little sense to restrict that right to the home, as “[c]onfrontations are not limited to the home.” Moore, 702 F.3d at 935-36 […]"
http://capitolfax.com/2013/09/12/this-j ... un-rights/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"As the Seventh Circuit correctly noted, neither Heller nor McDonald expressly limits the second amendment’s protections to the home. On the contrary both decisions contain language strongly suggesting if not outright confirming that the second amendment right to keep and bear arms extends beyond the home. Moreover, if Heller means what it says, and “individual self-defense” is indeed “the central component” of the second amendment right to keep and bear arms (Heller, 554 U.S. at 599), then it would make little sense to restrict that right to the home, as “[c]onfrontations are not limited to the home.” Moore, 702 F.3d at 935-36. Indeed, Heller itself recognizes as much when it states that “the right to have arms *** was by the time of the founding understood to be an individual right protecting against both public and private violence.” (Emphasis added.) Heller, 554 U.S. at 593-94
"* The Illinois Supreme Court has issued two gun-control rulings that are undoubtedly bringing great cheer to the NRA.
In the first, People v. Aguilar, a person was arrested in his own friend’s Chicago yard because he was holding a pistol. The Supremes cited the Heller decision and the 7th US Circuit’s recent landmark public carry decision (Moore v. Madigan) to knock down the arrest as unconstitutional…
if Heller means what it says, and “individual self-defense” is indeed “the central component” of the second amendment right to keep and bear arms (Heller, 554 U.S. at 599), then it would make little sense to restrict that right to the home, as “[c]onfrontations are not limited to the home.” Moore, 702 F.3d at 935-36 […]"
http://capitolfax.com/2013/09/12/this-j ... un-rights/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"As the Seventh Circuit correctly noted, neither Heller nor McDonald expressly limits the second amendment’s protections to the home. On the contrary both decisions contain language strongly suggesting if not outright confirming that the second amendment right to keep and bear arms extends beyond the home. Moreover, if Heller means what it says, and “individual self-defense” is indeed “the central component” of the second amendment right to keep and bear arms (Heller, 554 U.S. at 599), then it would make little sense to restrict that right to the home, as “[c]onfrontations are not limited to the home.” Moore, 702 F.3d at 935-36. Indeed, Heller itself recognizes as much when it states that “the right to have arms *** was by the time of the founding understood to be an individual right protecting against both public and private violence.” (Emphasis added.) Heller, 554 U.S. at 593-94
