Chicago Gun Ban Challenged

From CBS, In Part ~ Chicago has a ban on handguns (similar to DC) and within minutes of today's U. S. Supreme Court ruling, the Illinois State Rifle Association began the court fight to get Chicago's ban overturned as well.

In Chicago, unless your gun was purchased before the ban went into effect in 1982, it is illegal to possess a handgun within city limits.

Only police officers, aldermen and a handful of others are exempt from the ban. While other firearms can be registered, under current law, handguns cannot be registered and are considered illegal.

But gun rights advocates hope to change that. The Illinois State Rifle Association filed a lawsuit with just that purpose in mind at 9:15 a.m.

"We want to overturn this ban. It's pretty onerous. It takes the right of self-defense away from every Chicago citizen," said Richard Pearson, director of the Illinois State Rifle Association.

The National Rifle Association also plans to file lawsuits in Chicago and several suburbs, as well as San Francisco, challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.

Illinois State Sen. Kirk Dillard said at least one-third of the households in his hometown, Hinsdale, have guns, one of the highest percentages in the state. He hailed the Supreme Court decision, saying, "I think the ruling today is good news. The criminals have guns, but law-abiding citizens should not have their rights jeopardized."

As pleased as Dillard and other suburban Republicans in DuPage County were with the Supreme Court ruling, in Chicago it was a very different story among top democrats.

Mayor Daley, a proponent of strict gun control laws, wasn't happy about the Supreme Court ruling, calling it "a very frightening decision."

"If they think that's the answer ... they're greatly mistaken. Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun, and we'll settle it in the streets if that's they're thinking.

"It is frightening that America loves guns," the mayor said, "and to me, I think this decision really places those who are rich and those are in power, they'll always feel safe. Those who do not have the power do not feel safe, and that's what they're saying. If you're elected officials, you feel safe. You cannot carry a gun into a federal building. You cannot carry a gun into a federal court. So they're setting themselves aside, and really, they're saying to the rest of America that the answer to all the constitutional issues is that we can carry guns. And I just don't understand how they came to this thinking."

Gov. Rod Blagojevich said, "the decision of Supreme Court today is very scary and it's a big blow to those of us who believe in common sense gun laws … so they ain't always right and on this case, they're wrong again."

Some experts said the Supreme Court left room for local handgun controls in Chicago and suburbs such as Morton Grove and Oak Park, to survive, but only after a significant rewrite.

Alan Gottlieb, of the Second Amendment Foundation in the state of Washington, told reporters that Chicago's handgun ban has failed to stop violent crime. That has been one of the mantras of the gun lobby.

But a supporter of Chicago's law responded that facts are stubborn things, noting that murder and other gun violence here are far lower than a decade ago, claiming Mayor Daley's stringent gun enforcement deserves much credit.

Maria Ramirez couldn't agree more. She wears her son's picture close to her heart. It's all she has of him; 16-year old Matthew Michael Ramirez died in 2006 after someone pulled a trigger. "I don't want another mother to wake up like I do...look in son's bed, praying it's a bad dream," Ramirez said. "These guns that are gotten legally in the first place end up becoming illegal on the streets."

Pearson said he believes crime only rises with gun laws like Chicago's "because (the) criminal element knows people don't have a firearm for self defense."

That's one reason he was prepared to fight for an individual's Second Amendment rights. "Sure, I think it's an uphill battle … freedom always is." Pearson predicted that the fight that began with the filing of a lawsuit against Mayor Daley and the city at 9:15 a.m. Thursday would take between 18 months and two years to resolve. He said that if the Illinois State Rifle Association loses its lawsuit, it would appeal all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

But Chicago's Corporation Counsel Mara Georges said the city shouldn't have to defend its gun law, because the Supreme Court's ruling doesn't apply here. "Our ordinance continues to be valid law. The Supreme Court did not say that the Second Amendment right to bear arms extends to state and local governments and in fact, there's Supreme Court precedent that it does not."

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for four colleagues, said the Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home."

In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons." He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."

Gun rights supporters hailed the decision. "I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, criticized the ruling. "I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it," she said.

With an epidemic of gun violence in Chicago this year, Daley and other officials and activists have been lobbying for stricter state gun laws. But some defenders of gun rights say just the opposite of Mayor Daley, arguing instead in favor of the theories of economist John Lott, now of the University of Maryland. The onetime University of Chicago professor argued in his 1998 volume, More Guns, Less Crime, for a statistical correlation between laws allowing people to carry concealed handguns and a drop in crime rates.

Lott theorized the crime rate dropped because criminals were deterred by the possibility of confronting an armed victim. Lott also claimed the Chicago gun ban was to blame for an increase in crime.

Critics of Chicago's gun ordinance also say the law already aims to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, and that law-abiding citizens should be allowed to possess any firearm they desire.

Share |

Rice Applauds Court's Gun Ruling

After the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Washington D.C.'s hand gun ban, Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate Andrew Rice issued the following statement:

"The Supreme Court today affirmed what most Oklahomans already know to be true. No government can take away the Constitutional right of individual American citizens to own firearms," Rice said. "This is a victory for the Constitution, but it doesn't mean that we can stop being vigilant about protecting the rights of law-abiding gun-owners. As a U.S. Senator, I will consistently fight to protect the individual rights of every American citizen that are guaranteed by our Constitution."

Share |

The Gadfly Gets One Right

"I believe the court will overturn the DC gun ban, uphold the Second Amendment, and the vote probably will be five to four." ~ NRA commentator Mike McCarville, May 23, 2008.

Share |

Inhofe, Boren, Fallin, Lucas, Edmondson, Applaud Supreme Court's Gun Rights Ruling

Senator Jim Inhofe today applauded the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the DC Gun Ban law. The decision was 5-4.

“Today’s Supreme Court decision is a landmark victory for the protection of the Second Amendment and those of us who continue to stand up and strongly support gun rights.” Inhofe said.

“The Supreme Court is exactly right when it states ‘The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.’"

Said Congresswoman Mary Fallin: “The court made the right decision in upholding the principles of the Second Amendment. Law-abiding Americans have the right to the responsible ownership and use of handguns for sporting purposes and self defense. I am proud of the court majority, which overturned a law that was not only clearly unconstitutional, but out of step with the beliefs of a huge majority of Oklahomans.”

Said Congressman Dan Boren, a member of the NRA's Board of Directors: “This is a victory for law abiding gun owners all across the United States. As a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment, this decision renews my commitment to uphold every Oklahoman’s right to protect themselves and their family.”

In February Boren, along with hundreds of his colleagues in Congress, filed with the Supreme Court a brief for amicus curiae, or a “friend of the court” brief, contesting the constitutionality of D.C.’s ban on armed self-defense. He is also Co-Vice Chair of the Congressional Sportsmen Caucus which is one of the largest bipartisan caucuses in Congress.

“Today, the Supreme Court stood up for the individual rights of the people living and working in our nation’s capitol,” said Congressman Frank Lucas. “The Heller decision has righted a 30 year wrong and I wholeheartedly agree with it.”

Attorney General Drew Edmondson applauded the ruling, noting that Oklahoma was one of 31 states that joined a "Friends of the Court" brief arguing the DC gun ban is unconstitutional.

Charles Smith, executive director of the Oklahoma Rifle Association, told KTOK radio that the ruling ends the thought espoused by some that the 2nd Amendment is "a collective right." He said it clearly is an individual right to keep and bear arms.

“Today’s ruling proves Barack Obama is supremely wrong when it comes to gun control,” said Matt Pinnell, Director of Oklahoma Victory. “Unlike Senator Obama and his liberal gun-grabbing buddies, Oklahomans know law-abiding citizens have the right to own firearms to protect their families. Obama’s long anti-gun history just doesn’t fit with Oklahoma and his support of gun control is proof that he’s the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate.”

Among state legislators applauding the court's decision was Senator Don Barrington of Lawton, who said, “The U.S. Supreme Court got this one right. The founding fathers intended the Second Amendment to protect the rights of individual Americans to own guns, and we finally have a ruling from the high court that the liberal gun-grabbers have gone too far in trying to take away our gun rights.”

Barrington is a member of the Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus and a member of the National Rifle Association.

“This is excellent news for gun owners and for all Americans who want to own guns for hunting or to protect their families and homes,” said Barrington.

Share |

High Court Upholds 2nd Amendment

From Fox News ~ The Supreme Court says Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court's 5-4 ruling strikes down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision goes further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791.

[The ruling is a victory for Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson and members of the state's congressional delegation, all of whom argued the DC gun ban is unconstitutional. Congressman Dan Boren, D-2nd District, is a new member of the board of directors of the National Rifle Association, which spearheaded the fight against the gun ban.]

The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for four colleagues, said the Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home."

In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."

Share |

Child-rape Ruling Scuttles State's Law

By Barbara Hoberock/Capitol Bureau, Tulsa World ~ Action by the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday tossed out a recently enacted Oklahoma law calling for the death penalty for repeat child molesters.

The nation's high court, ruling in a Louisiana death penalty case, limited capital punishment to those who commit murder.

In the Louisiana case, Patrick Kennedy had been on death row for raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter.

The Oklahoma Legislature in 2006 passed and Gov. Brad Henry signed Senate Bill 1800, which allowed for the death penalty for repeat child molesters.

The measure covered forcible anal or oral sodomy, rape, rape by instrumentation or lewd molestation of a child under the age of 14 years old. It applied to anyone with a prior offense of those crimes. The law took effect July 1, 2006.

At the time of passage, one of the measure's authors, Sen. Jonathon Nichols, R-Norman, said he thought the U.S. Supreme Court would agree that raping a child is so heinous and horrific that it justified the death penalty. Nichols, at the time, said he believed the earlier court decision banning the death penalty for rapists only applied to those who rape adults. On Wednesday, he called the decision heartless.

"Child molestation and rape is as every bit as devastating to a life as murder," said Sen. Jay Paul Gumm, D-Durant, who proposed legislation calling for the death penalty for repeat child molesters. His measure was later included in Senate Bill 1800. "It kills the soul. I believe it is worthy of the highest punishment we can mete out."

Charlie Price, a spokesman for Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson, said no inmates are on death row as a result of the new law. The office is working to determine if any cases are pending.

The court's 5-4 decision struck down a Louisiana law that allows capital punishment for people convicted of raping children under 12. It spares the only people in the U.S. under sentence of death for that crime — Kennedy and another Louisiana man, convicted of raping a 5-year-old girl.

However devastating the crime to children, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion, "the death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child."

Share |