Second Amendment and Nancy Pelosi

[xrayzebra]

It was also announced today that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has stated D.C. can still regulate guns. See, that is how a man with balls does things.
Botox and all. You know she was smiling when she said this:

June 26, 2008
Pelosi Says D.C. Should Continue Gun Regulation
@ 12:29 pm by Andy Barr

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says that despite the Supreme Court decision to strike down its gun ban, the District of Columbia will still be able to regulate firearms.

"I think it still allows the District of Columbia to come forward with a law that’s less pervasive," Pelosi said at her weekly briefing Thursday. "I think the court left a lot of room to run in terms of concealed weapons and guns near schools."

- Mike Soraghan

Wonder if she remembers that the Supreme Court shot down Federal Law on guns near schools?
Oh, never mind. Laws only pertain to the little people.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

"I think the court left a lot of room to run in terms of concealed weapons and guns near schools."

It's going to be hilarious if the stupid bitch pushes some law that says you can't have a gun within 500 feet of a school or something. You'll have someone who lives across the street from a school filing suit and busting her and those like her in the chops with today's SC ruling.

[J.T.]

I own a gun and live like, a mile a way from a high school. Am I going to jail?

[J.T.]

What's next, if you live within a certain radius from a school and get caught with drugs in your house, do you go down for intent to distribute to school children?

F Washington without lube or protection.

[FromWayDowntown]

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. . . . Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.”

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited
the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.

[ElNono]

It was also announced today that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has stated D.C. can still regulate guns. See, that is how a man with balls does things.
Botox and all. You know she was smiling when she said this:

June 26, 2008
Pelosi Says D.C. Should Continue Gun Regulation
@ 12:29 pm by Andy Barr

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says that despite the Supreme Court decision to strike down its gun ban, the District of Columbia will still be able to regulate firearms.

"I think it still allows the District of Columbia to come forward with a law that’s less pervasive," Pelosi said at her weekly briefing Thursday. "I think the court left a lot of room to run in terms of concealed weapons and guns near schools."

- Mike Soraghan

Wonder if she remembers that the Supreme Court shot down Federal Law on guns near schools?
Oh, never mind. Laws only pertain to the little people.

I don't like her any more than you do, but she's actually correct on that.

[Wild Cobra]

What's next, if you live within a certain radius from a school and get caught with drugs in your house, do you go down for intent to distribute to school children?

F Washington without lube or protection.

Don't laugh. In my area, we have "drug free zones." The penalties are really strict if someone is caught with drugs within a certain distance from schools. I don't know if it city, county, or state, but we have thos in my area.

[Harry Callahan]

Nancy cannot help but smile with that face of hers. "Stretch".

Does SA have an opportunity to check out the fine work of Mr. Levin - the person who coined Nancy P's appropriate nickname? WBAP carries him in the metroplex.

[xrayzebra]

I don't like her any more than you do, but she's actually correct on that.


I know there can be regulation. But Nancy more than likely thinks things can remain the same. Especially when she spoke of schools.

Remember the supremes ruled a couple of years ago the feds couldn't regulate guns around schools. That was a local/state issue and not a fed issue.

[FromWayDowntown]

I know there can be regulation. But Nancy more than likely thinks things can remain the same. Especially when she spoke of schools.

Remember the supremes ruled a couple of years ago the feds couldn't regulate guns around schools. That was a local/state issue and not a fed issue.

I don't think Pelosi is talking about pervasive federal firearms legislation; in fact, what she's quoted as saying goes to whether the District of Columbia can regulate in certain areas. I think the conditional language in the Heller opinion certainly suggests that reasonable regulations of firearm possession and/or ownership are consistent with the Second Amendment. And I think that's precisely what Pelosi is talking about.

[xrayzebra]

I don't think Pelosi is talking about pervasive federal firearms legislation; in fact, what she's quoted as saying goes to whether the District of Columbia can regulate in certain areas. I think the conditional language in the Heller opinion certainly suggests that reasonable regulations of firearm possession and/or ownership are consistent with the Second Amendment. And I think that's precisely what Pelosi is talking about.

Of course you are right. Reasonable I think is the operative word. But I have never know Nancy to act reasonably or with reason. Her way or the highway.