Critical Supreme Court Case Today For Guns and Dogs

Locked
eaglerock814

Critical Supreme Court Case Today For Guns and Dogs

Post by eaglerock814 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:02 am

Supreme Court Gun Ban Ruling
Sets Scary Stage For Dog Owners

by JOHN YATES
The American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org

The Supreme Court will consider a case today that may decide the future of gun ownership in America. The heart of the decision is whether the right to keep and bear arms is an "individual right" or a "collective right."

"Collective rights" is an absurd concept on one hand, but a very dangerous one on the other. It means that we have no rights as individuals, but only as a member of a collective (such as the National Guard, which gun control advocates say is what "militia means in the Bill of Rights). Basic Soviet philosophy!

The concept of "collective rights" also is dangerous for dog owners, because it leads away from the concept of private property. Ownership becomes guardianship, if ownership lies with the collective rather than the individual.

Here are some excerpt from a CNN news article this morning:

"On Tuesday, The Supreme Court will decide whether Washington's sweeping ban on handgun ownership violates an individual's constitutional right to "keep and bear arms," setting the stage for a potentially monumental legal and social battle, just in time for the 2008 elections.

"The issue is one that has polarized judges and politicians for decades: Do the Second Amendment's 27 words bestow gun ownership as an individual right, or is it a collective one -- aimed at the civic responsibilities of state militias, and therefore subject, perhaps, to strict government regulation?

"What the Supreme Court says will really set the terms of the debate on gun control for years to come," said Orin Kerr, an expert on criminal procedure at George Washington Law School. "So everyone's waiting to find out what the justices will do."

"The Supreme Court has generally steered clear of settling the individual-versus-collective argument. It last examined the issue in 1939 without fully delving into the broader constitutional questions.

"Similar weapon-control laws could be in jeopardy, and jurisdictions such as the states of Maryland and Massachusetts and the cities of Chicago, Illinois, and San Francisco, California, filed briefs supporting the District of Columbia.

"Thirty-one states along with groups like the National Rifle Association support the gun owners.

"But both sides have privately expressed concern over how the justices will decide the issue, because the legal and political implications could be sweeping in scope.

"After a federal appeals court in March ruled the handgun ban to be unconstitutional, city leaders urged the high court to intervene, saying refusal to do so could prove dire."

The American Sporting Dog Alliance urges all gun owners, sportsmen and dog owners to keep a close eye on this court decision. We are a grassroots movement to protect the rights of sporting dog owners. We maintain strict independence and are supported only by the donations of our members. Please visit us at http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org .

User avatar
markj
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:36 pm
Location: Crescent Iowa

Post by markj » Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:01 am

I hope they get the right to bear arms back the criminals have a lot of em.

Folks need to be able to defend themselves bottom line. Cops are not waiting right close by to lend help, all they do is clean up the mess made from being targetted.

Glad I live in Iowa. Nebr is catching on now too. Westroads took down the no weapons signs, too bad my cousins sis in law had to die for this.
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=1103
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=5210
"If there are no dogs in Heaven,
then when I die I want to go
where they went."
Will Rogers, 1897-1935

User avatar
bruns333
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 183
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:28 am
Location: Central Ohio

Post by bruns333 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:40 am

This Supreme Court case is about the Washington D.C handgun ban only. At least tell the folks you are trying to inform what the actual case is about. You report this case just like the media does and only use the general words to get your personal slant reported. I am not anti-gun, but am not sure that all gun restrictive laws are bad. I don't think they are trying to take my hunting guns away from me if they pass a renewal of the D.C. handgun ban IMO. I personally feel no need to own a handgun for personal protection. I am not saying you can't, but maybe big cities and small towns and rural arears of this country need different laws for their particular situations. I know I am about to get the NRA's wrath, But lets at least tell folks about what is being decided and not add fuel to an already devisive issue.

User avatar
kninebirddog
GDF Premier Member!
Posts: 7829
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 12:45 am
Location: Coolidge AZ

Post by kninebirddog » Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:45 am

Persnally everyone should own a gun...
criminals like unarmed victims

it has been proven that there is less crime when everyone is armed

I also think they should legalize and tax drugs and put all the so call war on drugs money back into the schools for the Teachers and plenty of free after school programs for the children so they can do arts sports etc with out it costing the parenst an arm and a leg...That is the true war on drogs
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
"When I hear somebody talk about a horse or cow being stupid, I figure its a sure sign that the animal has outfoxed them." Tom Dorrance
If you feel like you are banging your head against the wall, try using the door.

User avatar
markj
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:36 pm
Location: Crescent Iowa

Post by markj » Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:48 am

it has been proven that there is less crime when everyone is armed
Yep, not much crime here in Iowa. Easy to get a CCW too.

If I was back in DC I would want a handgun on my hip.
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=1103
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=5210
"If there are no dogs in Heaven,
then when I die I want to go
where they went."
Will Rogers, 1897-1935

User avatar
bruns333
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 183
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:28 am
Location: Central Ohio

Post by bruns333 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:07 am

I want to see the proof that more guns equals less crime? I have looked at some of the Australian data and it is not black and white like a lot of folks would like you to believe. What is the murder rate per capita in the US versus Canada? What is the number of guns per person compared to the two? I would not feel safer walking around D.C with a handgun. I like having people who are paid and trained carrying around the guns. I just don't want to have to confront for instance an armed robber in a store were I am. He can take the money. Life is worth more than money or stuff. I have been robbed before in my house while my family and I slept. I would not want to go down and confront a person over stealing stuff. I think most of the murders are criminals killing each other or family related problems. It is rare that a person would come into my house or on the streets and want to kill me or my family for no reason. I know there are lots of examples where good folks have been hurt/killed by bad people that were strangers, but I will take my chances and continue to put my faith in people.

User avatar
ezzy333
GDF Junkie
Posts: 16646
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Dixon IL

Post by ezzy333 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:32 am

I also think they should legalize and tax drugs and put all the so call war on drugs money back into the schools for the Teachers and plenty of free after school programs for the children so they can do arts sports etc with out it costing the parenst an arm and a leg...That is the true war on drogs
Do all of you see our concern with some of these posts? This is an example of what happens.

An organization publishes their opinion of a law that is being debated here on a forum designed for individuals use.

The account is that organizations side of the story so they tend to slant the information to make their side sound good.

A member posts his opinion of the article and questions the slant of the article. Since it is an article without an individuals face on it there can be no discussion or explainations.

Then we get an opinion completely off of the subject, that has no relationship to GDF or the subject of this thread and is just a personal opinion and has little if any basis in fact.

Where does it stop? Do you see the very foundation of GDF changing if nothing is done? Should these type of comments just be deleted since they are completely off the wall? Should organizations be allowed to publish their articles here on a private forum or should they publish on their own forum?

I have my opinions but lets hear yours?

Ezzy
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=144
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=207

It's not how many breaths you have taken but how many times it has been taken away!

Has anyone noticed common sense isn't very common anymore.

User avatar
markj
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:36 pm
Location: Crescent Iowa

Post by markj » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:38 am

I like having people who are paid and trained carrying around the guns.
Where were they during the Westroads shooting? Columbine? I could go on but the cops cannot be where you are all the time so to be safe you will need a trained bodyguard such as I once was.

Ezzy, I see your point and agree, this could get ugly fast. Some have very strong beliefs on personal protection, some feel threatened by folks going armed even tho they have training for that.

I am one that feels everyone should be trained in firearms saftey and how to handle a weapon without shooting themselves or someone else. I belive it would reduce accidents.

This is my opinion and is worth what was paid for it.
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=1103
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=5210
"If there are no dogs in Heaven,
then when I die I want to go
where they went."
Will Rogers, 1897-1935

User avatar
topher40
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:09 pm
Location: NE Kansas

Post by topher40 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:44 am

I have said it once and I will say it again: If the moderators want to allow these post's it is fine with me, BUT GIVE THEM AN AREA OF THEIR OWN TO DO IT! Dont change GDF's rules and such to provide these folks a soapbox! I think some of these issues are important to keep up to date on and there should be another area for it if it is decided to allow these types of post's. I have yet to see ONE dog related post from eaglerock that wasnt PURE POLITICAL PROPOGANDA!

I have said my peace and I think lots of others have done the same in the past few months since eaglerock has become a member. I think the ball is in your court now Ezzy...................... :wink:
Chris E. Kroll
CEK Kennels
http://www.cekkennels.com
785-288-0461


Governments govern best when governments governs least


-Thomas Paine

User avatar
Greg Jennings
GDF Junkie
Posts: 5739
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 11:59 am
Location: Springboro, OH

Post by Greg Jennings » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:50 am

Chris,

I happen to agree with your position.

You need to understand, however, that none of the "moderators" have the ability to create a forum.

We can lock/unlock threads, delete posts/threads, move threads, split threads, and edit posts. Everything else is beyond "Moderator" and is into "Administrator" which only Grant can do.

I have e-mailed that suggestion to Grant.

Please feel free to make suggestions to make GDF better, but please keep it from being personal.

Greg J.

User avatar
Wagonmaster
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3372
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:22 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Post by Wagonmaster » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:54 am

Some boards have a forum they call Politics, so people who want to argue and vent, can argue and vent. But you know when you step into a discussion that is what is going to happen.

Personally, I would like to see this kind of stuff just stay off this particular forum, but I don't think you are going to be able to stop it, so maybe find a place for it where those who want to participate can do so and the rest of us don't have to read it.

We are about dogs. We can only hope the Supreme Court comes up with a sound decision on gun ownership. But leave dogs out of it.

User avatar
topher40
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:09 pm
Location: NE Kansas

Post by topher40 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:07 am

Greg-
I didnt mean anything personal but what I said, sorry if I offended anyone. :lol: I know that the mod's cant do anything to the structure of the site. I thought that all you mod's probably had a red phone or a bat signal to get hold of Grant to get stuff done. :wink: Thanks for listening to this little ole user! 8)

Wagon-
You said
"Personally, I would like to see this kind of stuff just stay off this particular forum, but I don't think you are going to be able to stop it, so maybe find a place for it where those who want to participate can do so and the rest of us don't have to read it."

I disagree. Being a "private" forum Grant can make whatever rules he wants and can instruct the mod's to lock or delete anything that they see fit. So remember that next time you post something, "Big Brother" is watching and you dont want to make him mad cause this is HIS HOUSE! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Chris E. Kroll
CEK Kennels
http://www.cekkennels.com
785-288-0461


Governments govern best when governments governs least


-Thomas Paine

User avatar
bruns333
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 183
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:28 am
Location: Central Ohio

Post by bruns333 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:50 am

Columbine, VT,NIU, and all those other tragedies are that, tragedies. Do we want guns in high schools? Maybe arm the teachers and then one day one of them will go nuts and kill students with their gun. I know the police can't be everywhere, but they are at least in theory trained to handle their weapons. I for one don't want everyone taught to handle a gun. Some folks just aren't mentally stable even though they seem like your average joe. I would not feel unsafe with trained civilians carrying weapons, but there is always a risk either way. It is a tough call. I just don't think it is at all black and white.

Matt

User avatar
Greg Jennings
GDF Junkie
Posts: 5739
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 11:59 am
Location: Springboro, OH

Post by Greg Jennings » Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:19 am

Would appreciate the members helping evolve this thread from one that is largely emotional debate to one that provides factual information.

Greg J.

User avatar
Richard *UT*
Rank: Master Hunter
Posts: 210
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 7:28 pm
Location: Kamas UT.

Post by Richard *UT* » Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:22 am

I say lock this type of thread down. Each one of us can decide for ourselves. I am sure there are lots of forums for both sides, Lets keep this forum about the dogs. I would be ok with a politics area, and would be sure to keep out of it.
Words that soak into your ears are whispered...not yelled
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=1618

User avatar
bruns333
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 183
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:28 am
Location: Central Ohio

Post by bruns333 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:27 am

I would agree about having a Politics section or not allowing it on this board. I stopped reading versatiledog because it was too political, but I don't want John Yates or folks like him to get a free pass on putting out slanted info. I like this board because it is dog focused and all the great help, advice, and info on here.

Matt

User avatar
markj
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2490
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:36 pm
Location: Crescent Iowa

Post by markj » Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:46 am

I like chineese food :) yes I also agree, this isnt for a gun dog forum. Lots of debate on other boards for this.


Dogs dont carry a gun..... if they did they would not need us :)
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=1103
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=5210
"If there are no dogs in Heaven,
then when I die I want to go
where they went."
Will Rogers, 1897-1935

eaglerock814

My Thoughts....

Post by eaglerock814 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:31 pm

There are two reasons why I think my initial posting is appropriate for this board.

The first is that it is called "Gun Dog Forum." In other words, it is about dogs that are used for hunting, and hunting presumes the use of guns in most cases. My assumption is that most of the people on this board own guns, use them for hunting, and often use them to hunt over a dog.

Thus, the right to keep and bear arms is a relevant topic for this board, in my opinion.

The second reason applies to every American. The issue is: Are rights for the individual? Or are they collective? In this case, the Supreme Court's decision will apply to the right to keep and bear arms. BUT, the legal precedent set by this decision will affect every courtroom legal interpretation of the entire Bill of Rights for years to come.

That's where dog ownership comes into play. A key legal argument by animal rights groups is that people do not own dogs. Instead, they want laws to make people guardians of dogs. That is the legal status givewn to human children. You do not own your children (and rightfully so!). You are their guardians. They have rights of their own, which government protects.

The issue specifically for dog owners is this: Do you want your dogs to have the same legal rights as your children? Are you a guardian for your dog? Or do you own it?

The legal differences in the two answers are immense.

Locked