The AP via the Houston Chronicle: After court ruling, towns rush to repeal gun bans
In 1981, this quiet northern Chicago suburb made history by becoming the first municipality in the nation to ban the possession of handguns.
Twenty-seven years later, Morton Grove has repealed its law, bowing to a U.S. Supreme Court decision in June that affirmed homeowners' right to keep guns for self-defense.
I don't normally say this, but what the hell: this is good news. I count it as an objective and substantive reduction in state power. Sure, the reason why the law was repealed is rotten - the Supremes' opinions do not cosmically determine Right and Wrong - but I'm glad the illegitimate authorities of one more block of land on this planet have backed down in one of their pursuits.
The village still bans the sale of guns.
Ohgawddamnit.
No matter what news I read, there is always something in it to trip my rage nerve.
"There hasn't been any pressure" to keep the ban, [Mayor Richard] Krier said, noting that the village's ordinance has been under scrutiny since the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Washington case. He also pointed out that the mostly residential village has never had a big problem with gun crime.
WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK, MAN?!
I cannot think of any more apt description to encapsulate the above except for primitive ignorance.
*grunt* Gun.
*grunt* AIIIIEEEE!!
*grunt* Huh?
*grunt* Gun dangerous!
*grunt* Danger?
*grunt* It kills!
*grunt* Kill bad.
*grunt* Push it away! No want here!
*grunt* Scaaaary gun.
Gun rights advocates hailed the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision affirming that individuals have a right to own guns and keep them in their homes for self-defense.
This was a
bittersweet birthday present, one that keeps on giving.
Gun rights advocates are just as deluded as the morons in control of Morton Grove. The court did no such thing. If it did, every single federal, state, and local law in the United States that imposes any restrictions or controls on the production, distribution, sale, purchase, ownership, storage, and use of firearms would be unconstitutional and immediately abolished by anyone in a seat of power with a clear mind and shred of honesty.
But this did not happen. Oh, no, this did not happen at all.
"We have no plans to amend our ordinance at this time," said Jennifer Hoyle, spokeswoman for Chicago's law department, noting that the ordinance has survived three previous court challenges. "We're prepared to take this fight to the Supreme Court if necessary."
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said last month that his city would "vigorously fight the NRA" and defended the ban as good for public safety.
Even Washington, D.C., has remained defiant, quickly enacting gun regulations that advocates say are still among the strictest in the country.
Had the court actually ruled in favor of an individual
right, this shit wouldn't be happening. For the vast majority of the nation, we must still get state permission to buy, own, and carry firearms. That isn't a right! That's a
privilege! The 2nd Amendment was functionally invalidated decades ago. The court decision is a salve to the edge of a very open wound.
"Others want to spend taxpayer money on some Don Quixote-type quest," [Todd Vandermyde, an NRA lobbyist in Illinois] said, referring to Chicago, whose lawyers insist the city's ban will withstand any legal challenges.
You hypocritical ass. Like you'd be saying the same thing when, once the Supremes' membership changes, this "interpretation" of the 2nd is reversed and it's once again totally cool with the judiciary for governments to make it impossible to own guns or ban them outright. Oh no, you'd be right up there in front demanding Your Elected Representatives to direct their Attorneys General to defend their now-antiquated pro-gun stance with taxpayer money. Barrels of it.
Fuck you, Todd.
Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said he was disappointed to see communities' gun bans disappear because of financial concerns.
"The pressure that Morton Grove is feeling is because the NRA and the gun-lobby lawyers are pushing these issues, basically forcing them to make a decision on where to spend their money," Helmke said.
© 2008 The Associated Press
Copyright © 2008 The Houston Chronicle
And while I'm issuing condemnations, here's a double-fuck-you to Helmke. Not only is he a restrictionist tyrant, but he's reaching for anything -
anything - he can use to substitute for an argument.
"Their money" indeed. Not one mention of private property anywhere. That idea was popularly rejected long before the 2nd.
