Winnetka, IL repeals gun ban
Another one bites the dust.
One of the most beneficial results of the Bush presidency, is his appointment of law-abiding judges and justices to the Federal courts. They provided the crucial difference that let the DC v. Heller case get to the Supreme Court and ultimately be won.
Now a number of towns are seeing the handwriting on the wall: The 2nd amendment means what it says, and gun bans are unconstitutional. The courts are no longer covering up for it. The towns can fight in court, and probably lose. Or they can just repeal their unconstitutional gun laws now, and save some money.
A great quote from the Winnetka city council guy: "The village has a significant financial risk in keeping the ban in place..."
Hey, bonehead. The village has a lot more than just a financial risk. Places with gun bans tend to get more of their residents KILLED than places where citizens are allowed to defend themselves, and crimes are deterred before they even take place. Looks like you still don't understand that, so the courts now have to force you to do the right thing. Well, it's still progress.
Welcome to reality.
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2008/11/winnetka-repeals-handgun-ban.html
Winnetka repeals handgun ban
November 19, 2008 at 7:25 AM
Winnetka Village Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to repeal the suburb's 20-year-old ban on possessing handguns but kept intact other portions of its ordinance regulating firearm use, council President Edmund Woodbury said this morning.
The action followed a recent Supreme Court decision and the filing of a lawsuit by the National Rifle Association and three village residents who asserted the ban violated their 2nd Amendment rights.
"The council voted unanimously to repeal the sections in our ordinance that had been the subject of the lawsuit by the NRA," Woodbury said.
"The village has a significant financial risk in keeping the ban in place, and given that, we felt it best to allow the national debate on this subject is settled."
Council members said they feared if they didn't repeal portions of the ordinance, it would cost the suburb thousands of dollars to fight the suit with the real risk of still losing in court.
About 20 people residents spoke for and against repealing the ban on handgun possession Tuesday, Woodbury said.
Village officials established the ban shortly after a mentally ill woman, Laurie Dann, shot to death one child and injured five others at Hubbard Woods Elementary School in 1988.
In the Chicago area, five suburbs-including Wilmette, Evanston, Morton Grove and Oak Park-had gun bans at the time of the Supreme Court ruling and have now taken similar measures to repeal them.
One of the most beneficial results of the Bush presidency, is his appointment of law-abiding judges and justices to the Federal courts. They provided the crucial difference that let the DC v. Heller case get to the Supreme Court and ultimately be won.
Now a number of towns are seeing the handwriting on the wall: The 2nd amendment means what it says, and gun bans are unconstitutional. The courts are no longer covering up for it. The towns can fight in court, and probably lose. Or they can just repeal their unconstitutional gun laws now, and save some money.
A great quote from the Winnetka city council guy: "The village has a significant financial risk in keeping the ban in place..."
Hey, bonehead. The village has a lot more than just a financial risk. Places with gun bans tend to get more of their residents KILLED than places where citizens are allowed to defend themselves, and crimes are deterred before they even take place. Looks like you still don't understand that, so the courts now have to force you to do the right thing. Well, it's still progress.
Welcome to reality.
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2008/11/winnetka-repeals-handgun-ban.html
Winnetka repeals handgun ban
November 19, 2008 at 7:25 AM
Winnetka Village Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to repeal the suburb's 20-year-old ban on possessing handguns but kept intact other portions of its ordinance regulating firearm use, council President Edmund Woodbury said this morning.
The action followed a recent Supreme Court decision and the filing of a lawsuit by the National Rifle Association and three village residents who asserted the ban violated their 2nd Amendment rights.
"The council voted unanimously to repeal the sections in our ordinance that had been the subject of the lawsuit by the NRA," Woodbury said.
"The village has a significant financial risk in keeping the ban in place, and given that, we felt it best to allow the national debate on this subject is settled."
Council members said they feared if they didn't repeal portions of the ordinance, it would cost the suburb thousands of dollars to fight the suit with the real risk of still losing in court.
About 20 people residents spoke for and against repealing the ban on handgun possession Tuesday, Woodbury said.
Village officials established the ban shortly after a mentally ill woman, Laurie Dann, shot to death one child and injured five others at Hubbard Woods Elementary School in 1988.
In the Chicago area, five suburbs-including Wilmette, Evanston, Morton Grove and Oak Park-had gun bans at the time of the Supreme Court ruling and have now taken similar measures to repeal them.
0
-
yep..same as in britain...and my own country..it`s been proved that the tighter the gun laws the more armed crime you have..no surprise there, but i can`t understand why politicians can`t see that it the truth and allow law abading people to have the right to have guns to defend themselves from criminals who don`t give a damn about laws or anyones rights except their own! 0 -
quote:Originally posted by dan kelly
i can`t understand why politicians can`t see that it the truth and allow law abading people to have the right to have guns to defend themselves from criminals
We have a saying in America: Gun control isn't about guns. It's about control.
Politicians aren't particularly interested in truth.0 -
quote:Council members said they feared if they didn't repeal portions of the ordinance, it would cost the suburb thousands of dollars to fight the suit with the real risk of still losing in court.
It's a shame that they repealed the "gun ban" is for finacial reason and not constitutional reasons.[xx(]
They still haven't learned IMO.0 -
I don't care why. Just as long as it got done. If the end result is a victory for our side then all is well. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
4 comments