Tomorrow – Tuesday, March 2, 2010 for those reading this late – the Supreme Court of the United States will hear McDonald versus Chicago.

For a preview of the issues, taped by Gail Pepin at the SHOT Show, listen to salient points being discussed by key players from the plaintiffs’ side. You’ll hear from Alan Gura, the brilliant young attorney who victoriously presented the winning case to SCOTUS in Heller v. Washington DC. You’ll also hear from Rich Pearson, president of the Illinois State Rifle and Pistol Association, and from Joe Tartaro and Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation. SAF is the organization that ramrodded this case to where it is, and those folks make me proud to have served on their board of trustees for decades. You can catch the briefing on Pro-Arms Podcast number 046, downloadable to your computer or from iTunes at http://proarmspodcast.com.

Contrary to the mendacious whining of sources like the Violence Policy Center and the Huffington Post, there are credentialed liberals who are solidly in our corner on this issue. That’s because it ain’t about guns, its about individual rights, civil rights, and the Bill of Rights itself. Even Newsweek, far from a pro-gun publication, says so.  See it HERE.

It is expected that SCOTUS will rule that the Heller decision applies in all states, and not just Washington, DC. The National Shooting Sports Foundation has a good roundup of the issues at their NSSF Blog.

L to R: JoeTartaro, Rich Pearson, Alan Gura, Larry Keane, Alan Gottlieb

Photo by Gail Pepin

1 COMMENT

  1. The struggle to maintain our rights and freedom is truly never ending. I heard that congress and the prez re-upped the Patriot act, something so laughably misnamed as to be absurd.
    I think it was Mr. Jefferson who wrote that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
    Hopefully, the SCOTUS will rule in favor of freedom and the constitution, and bring all such bans to to the trash bin, where they all belong.

  2. Huh. SCOTUS finally agrees to hear a case on this, and it happens to fall on my birthday. I know what I’m wishing for when I blow out the candles. I’m one of the aforementioned liberals; I’m occasionally surprised by the vitriol leveled at me by my erstwhile political allies when my stance on gun rights comes out. To me, it’s cut and dried Constitutional imperatives. I may disagree with a lot of readers over here on how government should use the authority it has, but I have no arguments against the constitutional limits on the AMOUNT of power the feds have. I have high hopes for this case.

  3. So, immediately following the SCOTUS decision to override the Chicago gun ban, there needs to be a follow-up suit in which the right to “bear” arms is spelled out as carrying openly or concealed. DC vs Heller has resulted in the right to “keep” arms, but last I checked it doesn’t help DC residents once they step outside their front door. What part of “keep AND bear arms” do they not understand?

  4. Be still my heart.

    Should we be fortunate enough to score a real victory here, it will be the result of years of untiring efforts by those troops on the ground, the pro-gun advocates — regardless of political affiliation.

    I’ll be holding my breath until the ruling is in!

  6. Hi, I am one of those liberals who has been in our corner on the second amendment. I have found several liberal blogs that are also with us. I have also taken up my own posts on Huffington because of all the Brady misinformation I see. This is where I started though and I am glad we are turning this stuff around. It makes me feel good to know that I can offer the uninformed a different perspective!

  7. If the SCOTUS were to rule that HEller only applies to D.C. and the 2nd amendment applies only to the federal government, then the bill of rights, as we know it, will be effectively neutered. I don’t think this will happen. However, I am concerned that the court will rule in favor of the 2nd amendment, with their usual catch-phrase of “reasonable” restrictions apply. They have applied the same concept to the 1st, 4th and other amendments to our detriment.

  8. I predict that the SCOTUS will rule the “Chicago gun ban” is un constitutional but that they can have “reasonable restrictions.” Next Chicago will enact extremely UNreasonable restrictions and we will have to go through a dozen lawsuits to “whittle” these restrictions down to what would be somewhat reasonable. We’ll never get a ruling that will, in one fell swoop, give us what we should have in the way of gun rights. The SCOTUS ruling will just be our “foot in the door” and we will have to fight like a pushy salesman to get the rest of the way in, to get the rights we should have in the first place.

  9. George, I s’pose I used to be one of those Liberals, too, until they moved the boundaries. I don’t think there’s anything magic about the numbering in the Bill of Rights – the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth and all the rest count as an instruction set about what rights we’re supposed to cherish. Too bad we don’t.
    Like the Ten Commandments – they forgot to say "don’t worry, you can skip this one."
    I’m kinda simple, I s’pose.