Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Legal and Activism (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/)
-   -   Unfriggin' real (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/unfriggin-real-55448/)

Jpyle 01-14-2012 12:09 AM

Unfriggin' real
 
A federal judge in NJ actually believes that the 2A infringes on a citizens right to be protected from lethal force...WTF?

Quote:

On Friday, January 13, 2012, a U.S. District Judge sitting in Newark dismissed the ANJRPC / SAF federal lawsuit challenging New Jersey’s extreme and subjective handgun carry laws, which have all but eliminated the right to self defense with a firearm outside the home in the Garden State.

Judge William H. Walls (a Clinton appointee) ruled that "the Second Amendment does not include a general right to carry handguns outside the home.”Characterizing the Second Amendment, he wrote "that privilege is unique among all other constitutional rights to the individual because it permits the user of a firearm to cause serious personal injury – including the ultimate injury, death – to other individuals, rightly or wrongly.”

In upholding the New Jersey law which effectively denies the right to carry a firearm for self defense outside the home, Judge Walls wrote "the protection of citizens from potentially lethal force is compelling.”

"The judge has it backwards,” said ANJRPC President Scott Bach."If he really cared about protecting citizens from lethal force, he wouldn’t be interfering with their constitutional right to defend themselves against violent criminals,” said Bach."Ironically, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the police owe no duty to protect individual citizens, so you’re on your own when you step outside your home,” continued Bach."This decision wrongly demonizes those who want to take responsibility for their own safety and turns all but a privileged few into helpless victims.”

The full text of Judge Walls’ decision is available here.

"The anti-gun bench hates the Heller decision, so it’s no surprise that some judges will stretch legal interpretation to the breaking point to limit or neutralize Heller,” said Bach, referring to the groundbreaking 2008 Supreme Court case which held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own handguns.

"The Second Amendment Foundation and ANJRPC are prepared to take this case all the way to the US Supreme Court, where SAF has already won two landmark cases defending the rights of gun owners,” said Alan Gottlieb, Founder of SAF.

Judge Walls’ decision sets the stage for appeals which could bring this case to the U.S. Supreme Court as early as next year.The case was filed in late 2010 by ANJRPC, the Second Amendment Foundation, and six individual plaintiffs, challenging New Jersey’s unconstitutional "justifiable need” standard for issuance of handgun carry permits – a nearly impossible standard to meet that has all but eliminated the right to self defense with a firearm in the Garden State.Requiring a showing of "need” to exercise a fundamental right is unconstitutional.

The appeal is expected to be filed later this Winter.

ANJRPC will keep you apprised of major case developments as they occur.Please watch for future alerts.



2ndAmendmentFreedom 01-14-2012 12:22 AM

Then the first amendment also infringes on your safety because you could piss off someone with something you said. Anyway it's ALWAYS about "your safety" "for safety concerns" "we have your best interest in mind" bull****.

Paladin201 01-14-2012 12:31 AM

A corrupt government always hides behind "doing what's best for the people".

c3shooter 01-14-2012 12:33 AM

Why, the answer is quite simple, really.


WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Gee- now WHERE did I read that? :rolleyes:

Vincine 01-14-2012 12:41 AM

Oh geeze, I remember when that novel was way in the future.

LIES ARE TRUTH.

PERCEPTION IS REALITY.

JonM 01-14-2012 12:49 AM

the most hateful shameful evil murderous vile disgusting words a human being in political power can utter is: "its for the good of the community"

any legislator or judge that hands down laws and rulings with that as the reason should be put in jail

Sonic82 01-14-2012 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jpyle (Post 676411)
A federal judge in NJ actually believes that the 2A infringes on a citizens right to be protected from lethal force

Yeah...like a Federal Judge doesn't carry a piece...another pompous, self-righteous hypocrite affecting good peoples lives.

AcidFlashGordon 01-14-2012 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paladin201 (Post 676425)
A corrupt government always hides behind "doing what's best for the people".

Or, "It's for the children." Question 5 here in Las Vegas was passed on that bit of B.S. So now, children can sit in bars and taverns, sucking down their Jack and Cokes or gin and tonics and not be exposed to second-hand smoke.

shadamai 01-14-2012 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AcidFlashGordon (Post 676626)
Or, "It's for the children." Question 5 here in Las Vegas was passed on that bit of B.S. So now, children can sit in bars and taverns, sucking down their Jack and Cokes or gin and tonics and not be exposed to second-hand smoke.

Lol....

Great, now only the criminals will be protected from 'potentially lethal force.'

ellis36 01-14-2012 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paladin201 (Post 676425)
A corrupt government always hides behind "doing what's best for the people".

Reminds me of the 55MPH speed limit days, when pulled over for "62 in a 55 zone" I would get the lecture from a fat-bellied deputy or town cop speaking in a southern drawl: "Son, we're just trying to keep our highways safe for a-l-l-l our citizens." Picking the pockets of 'citizens' with out-of-state tags was more like it.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:02 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.