Gun Control Group Braces for Court Loss

[jtkratzer]

We'll see what happens, but for them to admit defeat is interesting.

Gun Control Group Braces for Court Loss

'We've Lost the Battle on What the 2nd Amendment Means,' Brady Campaign Head Says

by TEDDY DAVIS
June 12, 2008


The nation's leading gun control group filed a "friend of the court" brief back in January defending the gun ban in Washington, D.C. But with the Supreme Court poised to hand down a potentially landmark decision in the case, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence fully expects to lose.
(ABC News Photo Illustration)

"We've lost the battle on what the Second Amendment means," campaign president Paul Helmke told ABC News. "Seventy-five percent of the public thinks it's an individual right. Why are we arguing a theory anymore? We are concerned about what we can do practically."

While the Brady Campaign is waving the white flag in the long-running debate on whether the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms or merely a state's right to assemble a militia, it is hoping that losing the "legal battle" will eventually lead to gun control advocates winning the "political war."

"We're expecting D.C. to lose the case," Helmke said. "But this could be good from the standpoint of the political-legislative side."

The D.C. ban prohibits residents from keeping handguns inside their homes and requires that lawfully registered guns, such as shotguns, be locked and unloaded when kept at home.

If the Supreme Court strikes down the D.C. gun ban, the Brady Campaign is hoping that it will reorient gun control groups around more limited measures that will be harder to cast as infringements of the Second Amendment.

"The NRA [National Rifle Association] won't have this fear factor," Helmke said.

Brady Campaign Attorney Dennis Henigan said there are multiple gun control measures that would not run afoul of a Supreme Court decision striking down the D.C. gun ban.

"Universal background checks don't affect the right of self-defense in the home. Banning a super dangerous class of weapons, like assault weapons, also would not adversely affect the right of self-defense in the home," said Henigan. "Curbing large volume sales doesn't affect self-defense in the home."

The Brady Campaign expects pro-gun groups to use the Supreme Court's decision in the DC case to challenge a gun ban in Chicago, the major city whose gun laws come closest to the nation's capital.

Although the Brady Campaign expects the Chicago ordinance to be challenged, it thinks that it may survive because it does not have the restrictions on long guns like the ones found in Washington, D.C.

The Chicago law may also survive because a decision in the D.C. case will likely not resolve the issue of whether the Second Amendment applies to the states and other cities that are not federal enclaves.

Looking beyond the Supreme Court's D.C. gun ban case to the race for the White House, the Brady Campaign views Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., as a better friend to gun control advocates than Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

But given that McCain stood by his support for closing "the gun-show loophole" during a recent speech to the N.R.A., the Brady Campaign president hopes that new gun restrictions can make headway regardless of who wins in November.

"For John McCain to be the political candidate of the NRA shows how things have changed," Helmke said.

ABC News' John Santucci contributed to this report.

Source

[AZXD]

YES, very interesting indeed.
Was the decision on Heller supposed to occur in June, or just around June. I forget.

[jtkratzer]

"We've lost the battle on what the Second Amendment means," campaign president Paul Helmke told ABC News. "Seventy-five percent of the public thinks it's an individual right. Why are we arguing a theory anymore? We are concerned about what we can do practically."

So, in a democracy, or at least a constitutional republic, let the voice of the people be heard, pack your sh!t up, and close up shop.

While the Brady Campaign is waving the white flag in the long-running debate on whether the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms or merely a state's right to assemble a militia, it is hoping that losing the "legal battle" will eventually lead to gun control advocates winning the "political war."

Define political war?

"We're expecting D.C. to lose the case," Helmke said. "But this could be good from the standpoint of the political-legislative side."

Nice try.

If the Supreme Court strikes down the D.C. gun ban, the Brady Campaign is hoping that it will reorient gun control groups around more limited measures that will be harder to cast as infringements of the Second Amendment.

Aren't all gun controls limitations of the Second Amendment?

"The NRA [National Rifle Association] won't have this fear factor," Helmke said.

Sure they will. Because you buggers never quit, even though 75% of people feel it's an individual right. No one wants to hear what you have to say.

Brady Campaign Attorney Dennis Henigan said there are multiple gun control measures that would not run afoul of a Supreme Court decision striking down the D.C. gun ban.

Like I said, you weirdos never give up.

"Universal background checks don't affect the right of self-defense in the home. Banning a super dangerous class of weapons, like assault weapons, also would not adversely affect the right of self-defense in the home," said Henigan. "Curbing large volume sales doesn't affect self-defense in the home."

Your definition of what an assault weapon limits my self-defense in my home. Large volume sales, you mean more than one gun per month...that limits me too.

The Brady Campaign expects pro-gun groups to use the Supreme Court's decision in the DC case to challenge a gun ban in Chicago, the major city whose gun laws come closest to the nation's capital.

As they should.

Although the Brady Campaign expects the Chicago ordinance to be challenged, it thinks that it may survive because it does not have the restrictions on long guns like the ones found in Washington, D.C.

It still has other unreasonable bans. It won't survive if DC doesn't.

The Chicago law may also survive because a decision in the D.C. case will likely not resolve the issue of whether the Second Amendment applies to the states and other cities that are not federal enclaves.

And you're the definition of optimism...

Looking beyond the Supreme Court's D.C. gun ban case to the race for the White House, the Brady Campaign views Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., as a better friend to gun control advocates than Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Of course they would...rightfully so and hopefully that helps Obama lose.

But given that McCain stood by his support for closing "the gun-show loophole" during a recent speech to the N.R.A., the Brady Campaign president hopes that new gun restrictions can make headway regardless of who wins in November.

Whatever floats your boat.

"For John McCain to be the political candidate of the NRA shows how things have changed," Helmke said.

When John McCain is the only candidate available that isn't a gun grabbing, racist, Marxist, the decision is pretty easy. It's a case of picking the lesser of two evils.

[KEVWYO]

Debating yourself jt?

[robin48]

Originally Posted by AZXD

YES, very interesting indeed.
Was the decision on Heller supposed to occur in June, or just around June. I forget.

I believe it was no earlier than June

[trik396]

We should be hearing something soon... mid June is what I remember.

We've got em' on the ropes... waiting for a knockout punch.. I, for one, cannot wait until the lawsuits start flying in Chicago. I also cannot wait to hear mayor Daley's response to all of this... the stumblebum that he is.

[Frenchy]

My heart bleeds for the Brady Bunch. May the lying hypocrites rot in HELL.

[cucamelsmd15]

"Universal background checks don't affect the right of self-defense in the home. Banning a super dangerous class of weapons, like assault weapons, also would not adversely affect the right of self-defense in the home," said Henigan. "Curbing large volume sales doesn't affect self-defense in the home."

Typical liberal idiots at their finest here folks. Last I checked, they both were semi-automatic weapons. Seems like the fact that it is a gun makes it a "super dangerous class of weapon". I can assault you with a spoon, are you going to try and ban that next?

[trik396]

Originally Posted by Frenchy

My heart bleeds for the Brady Bunch. May the lying hypocrites rot in HELL.

To quote you... "How tolerant of you"...

[Frenchy]

Originally Posted by trik396

To quote you... "How tolerant of you"...

Touche'