Gun Owners Win

[Jim Sr]

Gun Owners Win a Round Against the Army

October 15, 2014​

"The Army Corps of Engineers must let U.S. citizens carry guns on property it manages, including hydroelectric dams and recreation areas around them, a federal judge ruled."

Gun Owners Win​

​

 

[PIT BULL]

At least one federal judge understands.

 

[Overboost44]

That is a small win, but a good one. I hope this judge gets more cases. Now I'm off to find the properties where this would be useful for my Utah/VA permits.

 

[Bullfrog]

That is a small win, but a good one. I hope this judge gets more cases. Now I'm off to find the properties where this would be useful for my Utah/VA permits.

It sounds like you can limit your search to Idaho... it doesn't apply anywhere else.

"The plaintiffs are therefore entitled to a declaratory judgment that36 C.F.R. § 327.13 [Corps policy] violates the Second Amendment, and an injunction enjoining its enforcement in Idaho."
Winmill said he could not impose a nationwide injunction against an unconstitutional federal regulation since the plaintiffs did not file a class action.

The Corps argued it has the right to enforce the law because "it is a government entity acting as a proprietor managing its own property" and that the policy is needed to protect critical power supplies in light of Homeland Security threats.

Anyone else note this little tidbit? They seem to be under the delusion that public lands that they manage are actually their property. Not the first time I've been annoyed by that sort of statement.

 

[Vile Shadow]

That is a small win, but a good one. I hope this judge gets more cases. Now I'm off to find the properties where this would be useful for my Utah/VA permits.

Certainly sounds good to me. One must take his victories where he can git 'em.

 

[1BADI5]

To bad I go to those places as often as a OB/GYN.........

 

[Inigoes]

Anyone else note this little tidbit? They seem to be under the delusion that public lands that they manage are actually their property. Not the first time I've been annoyed by that sort of statement.

Yes, government has gotten away from being owned by the people.

For a good example, look at the Bundy/BLM fiasco from a few months ago.

It's nice to see Peruta cited in this case.

But Peruta ... rejected that line of argument: 'We are will aware that, in the judgment of many governments, the safest sort of firearm-carrying regime is one which restricts the privilege to law enforcement with only narrow exceptions. Nonetheless, the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.'"

Attached is the court ruling

 

[press1280]

Yes, government has gotten away from being owned by the people.

For a good example, look at the Bundy/BLM fiasco from a few months ago.

It's nice to see Peruta cited in this case.



Attached is the court ruling

Yes! Make it painful for the 9th to even think about going en banc on Peruta.

 

[Vile Shadow]

"Many governments"?!

Why the hell should we give a shit about "many governments"?

What part of "shall not be infringed" do some idiots in black robes with law degrees not understand?

 

[Maestro Pistolero]

Why a new thread?
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?p=3451419#post3451419

 

[VG-10]

"Many governments"?!

Why the hell should we give a shit about "many governments"?

What part of "shall not be infringed" do some idiots in black robes with law degrees not understand?

Exactly.....I can almost hear my parents voices in the back of my mind,
"If many governments jumped off of a bridge, would you do it too!"