In another victory for a broader interpretation of Second Amendment rights outside the home, the Delaware supreme court has ruled that the Wilmington Housing Authority cannot limit the right to keep and bear arms to the interior of its properties. [Click here to read the decision.] Doe v. Wilmington Housing Authority, challenged the original ban of firearms from all WHA properties. That policy was amended to prohibit firearms in common areas after the Chicago McDonald decision. But today’s ruling (available here) makes clear that the Second Amendment extends beyond the limits of the home. Here’s the money quote: “…our interpretation of Section 20 is not constrained by the federal precedent relied upon by the WHA, which explains that at the core of the Second Amendment is the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of ‘hearth and home.’ We agree with Residents that Article I, Section 20 is not a mirror image of the Second Amendment and that the scope of the protections it provides are not limited to the home.”
Yet another victory.
That’s how many in the last couple months?
This is great!
Um, ok that’s nice? Celebrate the small victories I guess.
These small victories add up. The anti crowd planned to kill gun rights by a thousand cuts. This is one of the thousand cuts that will destroy their position. Celebrate it.
I can hear them from here screaming “blood in the streets…”
LOL, the Brady bunch were so excited about this 2 years ago.. Can’t wait to see the look on their faces when they get yet another loss underneath their belt. When are people going to figure out that they are a lost cause and nothing more than a waste of money? Who knows.
While I agree with open carry, I don’t practice it because I prefer not to be a billboard. As far as dispatchers “educating” callers not gonna happen. They have no idea if the guy is just “educating”the public, or about to go postal. As a firefighter and emt we still respond to a car accident even when people tell dispatch we are not injured…..to many lawyers in this country to take people’s wird unfortunatley
And then, after they’ve had their fun getting exciting and calling the police, they might think a little more about it and realize that NO ONE can tell if someone is about to start a shooting spree – not until the person starts the spree – and that it makes as much sense to think that a man with a gun is about to shoot people as it does to think that a man in a car is about to do a hit-and-run.
That is the quintessential Liberal amygdala hijack right there. When facts counter to the Liberal’s delicate feelings and existing notions try to make their way into his brain, his amygdala flags those facts as “flight! fight!” and he starts to act out.
This is all primitive reacting. Like a rabbit watching a coyote making it’s way right towards him.
Everybody remember; what the British tried to do April 19, 1775 at Concord was perfectly legal.
Wow and MDA was a flury on twitter saying 15 states increased gun laws.
I wonder how many states are affected by this?
It seems like every time they claim a victory it turns out not so much..
I think we all need to kick in on a new pair of pants for the good mayor…I am quite sure he soiled himself. Poor guy.
A nice made in America safe that can be easily installed is by ZanottiArmor.com, great quality.
In Russia, front site acquire you!
Let’s see, free booze for the writers. What could possibly go wrong. Other than the fact that we’d never see an honest gun review again. It’s hard enough to get honesty from gun writers with their companies livelyhoods depending on advertisements from the same gun companies they’re reviewing. Throw free alcohol into it and we consumers will never hear truth again.
OK…I have been working Pro Gun causes and issues for 20 years and this is the FIRST time I have seen two DEMOCRATS destroy a REPUBLICAN with pro gun logic.
I dont really trust either party but most republicans are pro gun. I am amazed this guy didn’t stoke out.
He was running the typical liberal gun grabber argument:
1. Ignore the facts right in front of you.
2. Yell NO! NO! NO! when the facts are shown to you.
3. Blame someone else (NRA) even if they have nothing to do with it.
4. Ignore the fact that nearly all of the State legislature voted for the law.
5. Make idiotic claims with no basis in fact.
So…we need to all descend on Charleston ….Open carrying everything we have and watch his head pop off…Lol
This might immediately alter the DE CCW application process, which contains a HOLY CRAP! ghastly clause, although they are otherwise supposedly doing shall-issue under a may-issue law:
http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/delaware.pdf
PUBLISH YOUR INTENT TO SCORE CCW IN A LOCAL NEWSPAPER!? WTF!??!?!!!!
Yeah, Robert, I think “Yob tvoyu mat'” pretty much covers it…
…Although post/Ukraine Anschluss, if FSB Spetznaz/OMON want to practice being bullet sponges, I’m OK with it.
😛
Where does the last quote start?
Robert, I would love to hear more stories about your father.
Ok it’s the NYT!! A rag in one of the most communist socialistic cities in America!! What did we expect?? Wonder if Michael Bloomers slips them a little something something under the table!!
The NYT will always side with the progs/socialist/holier than thou crowd because that’s where the Long Term Money/Profits are!! All about pushing an agenda they feel is perfect for us uneducated lowly “Citizens” and making a Nice Profit along with it!! NYC is like Hollywood with a Moneyed Midget in charge!! JMHO!!
It won’t change anytime in the foreseeable future!!! The residents, for the most part, agree with Bloomers or they wouldn’t be there!! Birds of a feather!!
We need a professional drunkblogger covering the Shot Show, like VodkaPundit.
What fascinates me about this is how easily people like this recognize infringement when it is of a right they support. For instance, the NYT editorial board is fully cognizant of how various restrictions on abortion place burdens on those who provide and seek abortions.
Not trying to start a fight on abortion, just noting how it illustrates the doublethink at work here.
Except that the president just did commission “research on preventing death and injury from firearms and federal data collection on gun violence.”
Two questions: How did he do that if it wasn’t legal? What did the research tell us?
” immediate and effusive in its effusive self-congratulations. ”
immediate and
effusivevociferous in its effusive self-congratulations.😉 FTFY. 😉
One thing also not mentioned is that one reason the NRA and gun rights proponents were for cutting funding to the CDC on researching gun issues is because the CDC was found to be acting in a blatantly biased manner, as an arm to promote anti-gun legislation. The antis think its funding was cut by gun groups for unscrupulous reasons, but that isn’t the case.
Wait- now there’s not just assault WEAPONS but assault AMMUNITION?
Yup 🙂 And “cop-killer bullets.”
Only those of us who have tattoos:
http://connecticut.cbslocal.com/2014/03/19/gun-tattoo-mistakenly-brings-heavily-armed-police-to-maine-mans-home/
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle